Opinion
209 CA 21-00220
06-03-2022
In the Matter of Todd R. BRIGLIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, Respondent-Respondent.
TODD R. BRIGLIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE. LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (LAURA ETLINGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
TODD R. BRIGLIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE.
LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (LAURA ETLINGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., LINDLEY, CURRAN, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.
Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment that denied his motion for leave to reargue, granted the motion of respondent for leave to reargue and, upon reargument, dismissed the petition. The appeal from that part of the judgment denying petitioner's motion for leave to reargue must be dismissed inasmuch as no appeal lies therefrom (see People ex rel. Hinspeter v. Artus , 159 A.D.3d 1539, 1540, 70 N.Y.S.3d 435 [4th Dept. 2018], lv dismissed 31 N.Y.3d 1139, 81 N.Y.S.3d 364, 106 N.E.3d 747 [2018], rearg denied 32 N.Y.3d 1042, 88 N.Y.S.3d 400, 113 N.E.3d 456 [2018] ). Because petitioner was released to parole in December 2020, the remainder of the appeal must be dismissed as moot (see People ex rel. Luck v. Squires , 173 A.D.3d 1767, 1767, 100 N.Y.S.3d 603 [4th Dept. 2019] ; People ex rel. Seals v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs. , 32 A.D.3d 1262, 1263, 822 N.Y.S.2d 351 [4th Dept. 2006] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, we conclude that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Luck , 173 A.D.3d at 1767-1768, 100 N.Y.S.3d 603 ; People ex rel. Winters v. Crowley , 166 A.D.3d 1525, 1525, 85 N.Y.S.3d 815 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 917, 2019 WL 758283 [2019] ; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne , 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714-715, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 [1980] ).