Opinion
Argued November 21, 1975
Decided January 8, 1976
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, W. VINCENT GRADY, J.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Carl Saks and Samuel A. Hirshowitz of counsel), for appellants.
Louis A. Tirelli for respondent.
Order reversed, without costs, and petition dismissed on the ground of mootness (cf. Matter of Cummings v Regan, 36 N.Y.2d 969, 971).
Concur: Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, WACHTLER and FUCHSBERG. Judge COOKE dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum in which Judge JONES concurs.
I respectfully dissent and vote for affirmance. The proceeding should not be dismissed as moot since petitioner remains incarcerated, as distinguished from the situation in Matter of Cummings v Regan ( 36 N.Y.2d 969), where, at the time of argument before this court, petitioners were either out on parole or released by reason of expiration of sentence. Although section 214 of the Correction Law has been amended (L 1975, ch 131, eff Aug. 2, 1975), so as to include a new subdivision 6, providing for prompt written notification "of the facts and reason or reasons" for denial of parole following a hearing, the disposition made by this court does not provide for a new parole release hearing to which petitioner is entitled.
Order reversed, etc.