Opinion
8403 Index 150140/18
02-14-2019
In re Gail HANNA, Petitioner–Appellant, v. The NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF PAROLE, Respondent–Respondent.
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel, New York (Elise C. Funke of counsel), for appellant. Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General, New York (Blair J. Greenwald of counsel), for respondent.
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel, New York (Elise C. Funke of counsel), for appellant.
Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General, New York (Blair J. Greenwald of counsel), for respondent.
Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Webber, Kahn, Kern, JJ.
Respondent's denial of parole was not arbitrary and capricious considering, as required, all of the relevant statutory factors, including the serious nature of petitioner's offense ( Matter of Silmon v. Travis , 95 N.Y.2d 470, 477, 718 N.Y.S.2d 704, 741 N.E.2d 501 [2000] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, there was official opposition to her parole application ( contra Matter of Smith v. New York State Bd. of Parole , 34 A.D.3d 1156, 1157, 824 N.Y.S.2d 498 [3d Dept. 2006] ), and the Parole Board members did not improperly apply their personal beliefs to the issues of petitioner's mental health or her insight into her offense ( Silmon , 95 N.Y.2d at 477, 718 N.Y.S.2d 704, 741 N.E.2d 501 ).