From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mascorro v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Dec 11, 2014
123 A.D.3d 1268 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

518470

12-11-2014

In the Matter of Victor MASCORRO, Appellant, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

Victor Mascorro, Rome, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet of counsel), for respondent.


Victor Mascorro, Rome, appellant pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lynch, J.), entered January 29, 2014 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondent's motion to dismiss the petition.

Petitioner is serving an aggregate prison term of 16 to 32 years upon his conviction of various crimes, including rape in the first degree. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging his removal from the Sex Offender Counseling and Treatment Program. Respondent moved to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Supreme Court granted respondent's motion and this appeal ensued.

Petitioner was required to file a grievance challenging his removal from the treatment program (see Matter of Hawes v. Fischer, 119 A.D.3d 1304, 1305, 990 N.Y.S.2d 367 [2014] ; Matter of Torres v. Fischer, 73 A.D.3d 1355, 1356, 899 N.Y.S.2d 918 [2010] ). He admittedly did not avail himself of this procedure, and his letter of complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Program Services at the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision did not remedy this defect (see Matter of Torres v. Fischer, 73 A.D.3d at 1356, 899 N.Y.S.2d 918 ; Matter of Muniz v. David, 16 A.D.3d 939, 939–940, 791 N.Y.S.2d 733 [2005] ). Further, contrary to petitioner's contention, none of the exceptions to the exhaustion doctrine are applicable here (see Matter of Georgiou v. Daniel, 21 A.D.3d 1230, 1231, 801 N.Y.S.2d 421 [2005] ). Accordingly, dismissal of the petition was appropriate.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

GARRY, J.P., ROSE, EGAN JR., DEVINE and CLARK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mascorro v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Dec 11, 2014
123 A.D.3d 1268 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Mascorro v. Annucci

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Victor MASCORRO, Appellant, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 11, 2014

Citations

123 A.D.3d 1268 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8700
996 N.Y.S.2d 558

Citing Cases

Smith v. Dep't of Corr. & Cmty. Supervision

Supreme Court granted the motion and this appeal ensued.Petitioner was required to file a grievance…

Green v. Uhler

Petitioner's failure to await the outcome of his appeals to respondent and CORC constitutes a fatal…