Opinion
TP 03-02395.
Decided April 30, 2004.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, entered November 12, 2003 in Erie County [Russell P. Buscaglia, A.J.]) to review a determination of respondent. The determination found after a final parole revocation hearing that petitioner had violated parole and revoked petitioner's parole release.
DARRYL BOYD, PETITIONER PRO SE.
ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (ROBERT M. GOLDFARB OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Before: PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, PINE, WISNER, AND LAWTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.
Memorandum: The determination that petitioner violated the conditions of his parole is supported by substantial evidence ( see Matter of Prodromidis v. McCoy, 292 A.D.2d 769). Petitioner failed to preserve for our review his contentions relating to respondent's alleged failure to produce or offer into evidence a written copy of the special condition he was charged with violating ( see Matter of Stanbridge v. Hammock, 55 N.Y.2d 661, 663). In any event, petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to those contentions ( see People ex rel. McDaniel v. Travis, 288 A.D.2d 940, 941, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 613; Matter of Boyer v. Chairman, New York State Parole Bd., 199 A.D.2d 584). We reject the further contention of petitioner that he was denied meaningful representation on his administrative appeal ( see generally People ex rel. McCrory v. Rodriguez, 191 A.D.2d 664).