From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Burgos v. Berbary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 27, 2000
278 A.D.2d 930 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

December 27, 2000.

Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Sconiers, J. — CPLR art 78.

PRESENT: GREEN, J. P., PINE, HAYES AND SCUDDER, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition dismissed.

Memorandum:

Supreme Court erred in vacating the determination denying petitioner parole release and directing the Parole Board to reconsider petitioner's parole eligibility. Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the Parole Board complied with the requirements of Executive Law § 259-i (2) (c) (A) in denying petitioner parole release ( cf ., Matter of King v. New York State Div. of Parole, 83 N.Y.2d 788, 791). It is well settled that, "[i]f the [Parole] Board complies with the procedures set forth in Executive Law § 259-i, its discretionary determinations are not subject to review unless there has been a showing of `irrationality bordering on impropriety'" ( Matter of Zane v. Travis, 231 A.D.2d 848, quoting Matter of Russo v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 N.Y.2d 69, 77; see, Executive Law § 259-i). Petitioner made no such showing.


Summaries of

Matter of Burgos v. Berbary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 27, 2000
278 A.D.2d 930 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Burgos v. Berbary

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF RICARDO BURGOS, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, v. JAMES L. BERBARY…

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

Date published: Dec 27, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 930 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
718 N.Y.S.2d 687

Citing Cases

State ex rel. Hoyer v. Stanford

If the Parole Board complied with the procedures set forth in Executive Law §259-i, its discretionary…

Hynes v. Stanford

If the Parole Board complies with the procedures set forth in the Executive Law §259-i, its discretionary…