Thomas v. New York State Board of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Thomas v. New York State Board of Parole

208 A.D.2d 460, 617 N.Y.S.2d 309

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

DecidedOctober 25, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 208 A.D.2d 460 (Thomas v. New York State Board of Parole) 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

Thomas v. New York State Board of Parole, 208 A.D.2d 460, 617 N.Y.S.2d 309 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Board of Parole dated July 16, 1991, affirming a finding, after an administrative hearing, that petitioner violated the terms of his parole, is unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Joan Lobis, J.], entered on or about July 24, 1992) dismissed, without costs.

Although the Maryland Order for Probation does not strictly comply with the provisions of CPLR 4540 (c), which requires certification under seal or exemplification, the Hearing Officer did not abuse her discretion in admitting this document on the ground of its apparent authenticity, including the outline of a seal and the "true copy” stamp of the Administrative Clerk of the District Court of Maryland on the court-generated non-jury trial report submitted with the Order and memorializing the conviction for which the sentence of probation was imposed (see, People v Parsons, 84 AD2d 510, affd 55 NY2d 858). Moreover, the Parole Violation Reports entered into evidence constituted sufficient evidence to sustain the determination to revoke parole (People ex rel. McGee v Walters, 62 NY2d 317, 321). Concur—Wallach, J. P., Asch, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Board of Parole dated July 16, 1991, affirming a finding, after an administrative hearing, that petitioner violated the terms of his parole, is unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Joan Lobis, J.], entered on or about July 24, 1992) dismissed, without costs.

Although the Maryland Order for Probation does not strictly comply with the provisions of CPLR 4540 (c), which requires certification under seal or exemplification, the Hearing Officer did not abuse her discretion in admitting this document on the ground of its apparent authenticity, including the outline of a seal and the "true copy” stamp of the Administrative Clerk of the District Court of Maryland on the court-generated non-jury trial report submitted with the Order and memorializing the conviction for which the sentence of probation was imposed (see, People v Parsons, 84 AD2d 510, affd 55 NY2d 858). Moreover, the Parole Violation Reports entered into evidence constituted sufficient evidence to sustain the determination to revoke parole (People ex rel. McGee v Walters, 62 NY2d 317, 321). Concur—Wallach, J. P., Asch, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 460, 617 N.Y.S.2d 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-new-york-state-board-of-parole-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack