From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brownlee v. Kohm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 28, 2009
61 A.D.3d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2008-09100.

April 28, 2009.

Proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent Robert C. Kohn, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Queens County, to resentence the petitioner in the matter entitled People v Brownlee, pending in that court under indictment No. 10037/07, as a first-time offender rather than as a predicate felony offender. Application by the petitioner to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.

Anthony Brownlee, East Elmhurst, N.Y., petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York, N.Y., respondent pro se and for respondent Robert C. Kohm.

Before: Dillon, J.P., Florio, Angiolillo and Belen, JJ.


Ordered that the application to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act and only when there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought ( see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.


Summaries of

Brownlee v. Kohm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 28, 2009
61 A.D.3d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Brownlee v. Kohm

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ANTHONY BROWNLEE, Petitioner, v. ROBERT C. KOHM et al.…

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

Date published: Apr 28, 2009

Citations

61 A.D.3d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 3515
877 N.Y.S.2d 460

Citing Cases

Wynkoop v. 622A President St. Owners Corp.

The petitioner in this case is not seeking a judicial review, which would be appropriate under writ of…

Velez v. Dennehy

The petitioner in this case is not seeking a judicial review, which would be appropriate under writ of…