From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Putland v. Victor Herbert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 27, 1996
231 A.D.2d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

September 27, 1996.

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition dismissed.

Before: Present Denman, P.J., Lawton, Fallon, Doerr and Balio, JJ.


Supreme Court erred in granting the petition. The decision to deny parole may be based upon the seriousness of the crime and its violent nature ( see, Matter of Weir v New York State Div. of Parole, 205 AD2d 906, 907) and, "[i]n the absence of a convincing demonstration to the contrary, it is presumed that the New York State Division of Parole acted properly in accordance with statutory requirements" ( Matter of McClain v New York State Div. of Parole, 204 AD2d 456). Petitioner failed to establish that the Parole Board did not consider the enumerated factors in Executive Law § 259-i (1) (a) and (2) (c). We conclude on this record that the Parole Board acted in accordance with the statutory criteria and that its discretionary release decision therefore is not subject to judicial review ( see, Executive Law § 259-i; Matter of McClain v New York State Div. of Parole, supra, at 457). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J. — CPLR art 78.)


Summaries of

In re Putland v. Victor Herbert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 27, 1996
231 A.D.2d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

In re Putland v. Victor Herbert

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DAVID PUTLAND, Respondent, v. VICTOR HERBERT, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Sep 27, 1996

Citations

231 A.D.2d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
648 N.Y.S.2d 401

Citing Cases

Matter of Silmon v. Travis

The Parole Board was plainly aware of the petitioner's institutional and educational achievements, the…

Matter of Fuchino v. Herbert

There is no merit to the contention of petitioner that the Parole Board failed to consider the enumerated…