From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moye v. New York Executive Department Board of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 15, 1994
210 A.D.2d 711 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

December 15, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County.


Petitioner, on parole while serving a sentence of 5 to 10 years, was found to have violated his parole by threatening his wife, using cocaine and failing to maintain attendance at an alcohol rehabilitation program. Petitioner's parole was consequently revoked and he was determined to be ineligible for parole for 36 months.

Initially, we find that petitioner's final parole revocation hearing was timely. Any delay beyond the time allowed for such a hearing was attributable to petitioner's request for a postponement. Petitioner's parole officer testified that he heard petitioner threaten his spouse and had ascertained that petitioner had failed to attend his rehabilitation program. In addition, evidence was admitted establishing that petitioner had tested positive for cocaine. We conclude that this evidence constitutes substantial evidence to support the Board's determination. Finally, we find no abuse of discretion in the Board's determination that petitioner not be reconsidered for parole for 36 months.

Cardona, P.J., Mikoll, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

Moye v. New York Executive Department Board of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 15, 1994
210 A.D.2d 711 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Moye v. New York Executive Department Board of Parole

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of THOMAS MOYE, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT…

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

Date published: Dec 15, 1994

Citations

210 A.D.2d 711 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
621 N.Y.S.2d 934

Citing Cases

People ex rel. McClam v. Lacy

The laboratory report, which was certified by the laboratory's director, indicated that petitioner's urine…

In the Matter of Miller v. Board of Parole

There is also no support in the record for petitioner's claim of bias (see, People ex rel. Brazeau v.…