Shabazz v. Artus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shabazz v. Artus

62 A.D.3d 1230, 878 N.Y.S.2d 924

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 28, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 62 A.D.3d 1230 (Shabazz v. Artus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shabazz v. Artus, 62 A.D.3d 1230, 878 N.Y.S.2d 924 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review two determinations of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge two tier II disciplinary determinations finding him guilty of refusing a direct order and failing to have his hair tied back. The Attorney General advises this Court that the determinations at issue have been administratively reversed and all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record. Accordingly, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and this matter is dismissed as moot (see Matter of York v Fischer, 55 AD3d 1096 [2008]; Matter of Rivera v Brown, 54 AD3d 1089 [2008]).

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Kane, Kavanagh and Garry, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review two determinations of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge two tier II disciplinary determinations finding him guilty of refusing a direct order and failing to have his hair tied back. The Attorney General advises this Court that the determinations at issue have been administratively reversed and all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record. Accordingly, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and this matter is dismissed as moot (see Matter of York v Fischer, 55 AD3d 1096 [2008]; Matter of Rivera v Brown, 54 AD3d 1089 [2008]).

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Kane, Kavanagh and Garry, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 1230, 878 N.Y.S.2d 924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shabazz-v-artus-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack