From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Makas v. Venettozzi

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 21, 2016
138 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

04-21-2016

In the Matter of Steven MAKAS, Petitioner, v. Donald VENETTOZZI, as Acting Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Steven Makas, Napanoch, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.


Steven Makas, Napanoch, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge will be refunded to his inmate account. As the record does not reflect that any loss of good time was imposed, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Kagan v. Lewin, 134 A.D.3d 1386, 1386, 21 N.Y.S.3d 641 [2015] ).

ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs, but with disbursements in the amount of $15.

LAHTINEN, J.P., McCARTHY, EGAN JR. and LYNCH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Makas v. Venettozzi

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 21, 2016
138 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Makas v. Venettozzi

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Steven MAKAS, Petitioner, v. Donald VENETTOZZI, as Acting…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 21, 2016

Citations

138 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
138 A.D.3d 1342
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 3056

Citing Cases

Rodriguez v. Prack

The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all…

Cruz v. Annucci

The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively…