From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex Rel. Medina v. Superintendent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 21, 1984
101 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

May 21, 1984


In a habeas corpus proceeding, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), entered June 14, 1983, which dismissed the writ. ¶ Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. ¶ Petitioner was given 14 days' notice of the date of the originally scheduled hearing, as required by section 259-i (subd 3, par [f], cl [iii]) of the Executive Law. The statute does not require that at least 14 days prior notice be given for a rescheduled or adjourned final parole revocation hearing ( People ex rel. Haskins v Waters, 87 A.D.2d 657; see, also, People ex rel. Wentsley v Hammock, 89 A.D.2d 1058). ¶ In addition, we note that an alleged denial of the statutory right to timely notice of a final parole revocation hearing is not subject to judicial review unless the parolee has first sought a determination of his claim at the final hearing (see People ex rel. Walker v New York State Bd. of Parole, 98 A.D.2d 33). Bracken, J.P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People ex Rel. Medina v. Superintendent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 21, 1984
101 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

People ex Rel. Medina v. Superintendent

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. LAWRENCE MEDINA, Appellant, v…

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

Date published: May 21, 1984

Citations

101 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Robertson v. Div. of Parole

" (Emphasis supplied.)People ex rel. Diamond v Flood ( 100 A.D.2d 604) relied upon the Second Department's…

People, McKay v. Sheriff of Cty of Rensselaer

The notice of violation states the hearing date. As with statutory requirements concerning the scheduling of…