From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Leclaire

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 25, 2007
44 A.D.3d 1205 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 502186.

October 25, 2007.

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 which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Edguardo Rodriguez, Malone, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

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


At the conclusion of a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of smuggling. That determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, prompting petitioner to commence this CPLR article 78 proceeding. The Attorney General has advised this Court that, during the pendency of this proceeding, the determination has been administratively reversed and all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record. Inasmuch as petitioner has been afforded all of the relief to which he is entitled, the matter is now dismissed as moot ( see Matter of Lewis v. Goord, 37 AD3d 917, 917 [2007]).

Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Leclaire

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 25, 2007
44 A.D.3d 1205 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Leclaire

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of EDGUARDO RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. LuCIEN LECLAIRE, as…

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

Date published: Oct 25, 2007

Citations

44 A.D.3d 1205 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 7963
843 N.Y.S.2d 525

Citing Cases

Williams v. Smith

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

Robles v. Fischer

The Attorney General has advised this Court in writing that the determination in question has been…