Opinion
December 18, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Burton Hecht, J.).
The final parole revocation hearing was not untimely. Several adjournments were requested or consented to by petitioner's attorney, and are not chargeable to the respondent Division of Parole (see, People ex rel. Citro v. Sullivan, 70 N.Y.2d 391). We also note that the proper forum for petitioner to challenge seizure of the physical evidence was in a suppression court, rather than before the Division of Parole. (See, People ex rel. Coldwell v. New York State Div. of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458.) Although the physical evidence, a handgun, seized from petitioner was suppressed by the court subsequent to the preliminary hearing, the Hearing Officer explicitly reserved a second charge, assault, for the final revocation hearing (compare, People ex rel. Piccarillo v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 48 N.Y.2d 76), and would not be estopped from revoking petitioner's parole with respect to this charge. (Cf., People ex rel. Matthews v. New York State Div. of Parole, 58 N.Y.2d 196.)
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Asch, Kassal, Wallach and Smith, JJ.