From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ferro v. Luvera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 2001
288 A.D.2d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

November 21, 2001.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Columbia County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which withheld petitioner's good time allowance.

Arthur Ferro, Hudson, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Frank Brady of counsel), Albany, for respondents.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and, Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a decision of the Time Allowance Committee, which was affirmed on administrative appeal, withholding 11 months of good time as a result of petitioner's failure to participate in an alcohol and substance abuse program, claiming that it was not supported by substantial evidence. Inasmuch as the record establishes that petitioner has been released from prison given his maximum expiration date of October 8, 2001, his challenge to the loss of good time is moot (see,Matter of Walker v. Senkowski, 260 A.D.2d 830, 831). We reject petitioner's contention that this matter presents an exception to the mootness doctrine.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.


Summaries of

Ferro v. Luvera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 2001
288 A.D.2d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Ferro v. Luvera

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ARTHUR FERRO, Petitioner, v. ANTHONY LUVERA, as Chair of…

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

Date published: Nov 21, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
732 N.Y.S.2d 913

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Roach v. Goord

Petitioner challenges a determination withholding one year of good time allowance based upon his failure to…

In the Matter of Ellington v. Senkowski

In the judgment on appeal, Supreme Court denied petitioner's application, ruling that he had failed to comply…