From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Santiago v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 14, 2000
275 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

September 14, 2000.

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 respondent Director of Temporary Release Programs removing petitioner from the temporary release program.

Carlos Santiago, Rome, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Peter G. Crary of counsel), Albany, for respondents.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Graffeo, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT


Petitioner, a prison inmate participating in a temporary release program (see, Correction Law art 26), was charged in a misbehavior report with violating temporary release program rules by being present in a bar past curfew and assaulting a patron. The charges stem from allegations that petitioner struck another person with a beer bottle at a bar in the City of Rome, Oneida County, at 12:15 A.M. on November 8, 1998. Proof at the ensuing disciplinary hearing included the affidavits of three eyewitnesses to the incident. Petitioner was found guilty of violating those provisions of his temporary release contract relating to curfews and engaging in conduct that is a menace to the safety of others. Notably, petitioner did not appeal this determination. His temporary release status was thereafter revoked based on his failure to comply with the temporary release program rules.

To the extent that petitioner challenges the disciplinary determination finding him guilty of violating temporary release program rules, the propriety of this determination is not properly before us (see, Matter of Beyah v. Leonardo, 182 A.D.2d 868). As to the determination removing petitioner from the temporary release program, our review of the determination discerns no violation of any statutory requirement or denial of any constitutional right (see, Matter of Dixon v. Recore, ___ A.D.2d ___, 707 N.Y.S.2d 254). Nor is the determination affected by irrationality bordering on impropriety (see, id.). Thus, it will not be disturbed. Furthermore, contrary to petitioner's contention, the fact that a criminal assault charge arising out of the incident was dismissed does not warrant automatic reinstatement into the temporary release program (see generally, People ex rel. Murray v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 70 A.D.2d 918, affd 50 N.Y.2d 943).

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

Matter of Santiago v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 14, 2000
275 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Santiago v. Selsky

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CARLOS SANTIAGO, Petitioner, v. DONALD SELSKY, as…

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

Date published: Sep 14, 2000

Citations

275 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
713 N.Y.S.2d 504

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Hall v. Zenzen

Finally, petitioner was not entitled to a full hearing before his temporary release status was revoked…

Constantino v. Goord

That determination was affirmed on administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued. Inasmuch…