Opinion
No. 17407 Index No. 100008/20 Case No. 2022-00750
02-28-2023
In the Matter of Wayne Salton, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sergeant Jordan S. Mazur, etc., Respondent-Respondent.
Wayne Salton, appellant pro se. Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Amanda Abata of counsel), for respondent.
Wayne Salton, appellant pro se.
Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Amanda Abata of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Kern, J.P., Oing, Kennedy, Mendez, Pitt-Burke, JJ.
Order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, New York County (Erika Edwards, J.), entered on or about December 15, 2021, which granted the cross motion of respondent Records Access Appeals Officer, employed by the New York City Police Department (NYPD), to dismiss the petition seeking to annul the October 29, 2019 denial of petitioner's Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request to obtain records of an investigation related to a July 19, 2000 property clerk's invoice for his DNA and to require the NYPD to provide the requested information, and seeking costs and fees, denied the petition, and dismissed this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The "record... establishes that the petition was time-barred" (Matter of Andrade v New York City Police Dept., 106 A.D.3d 520, 521 [1st Dept 2013]; see also Kinberg v Schwartzapfel, Novick, Truhowsky, Marcus, PC, 136 A.D.3d 431, 431 [1st Dept 2016]). The FOIL request at issue was petitioner's third, by which he sought the same information as in one request denied on September 5, 2018 and a second request for which his administrative appeal was denied on February 18, 2019. As each one involved the same homicide investigation, for which he was interviewed and from which he was cleared based on the DNA swab he provided, his latest request "did not extend or toll the statute of limitations on article 78 proceedings," and the commencement of the instant proceeding on January 3, 2020 was untimely (Matter of United Probation Officers Assn. v City of New York, 187 A.D.3d 456, 456-457 [1st Dept 2020]; accord Matter of Cross v Russo, 132 A.D.3d 454, 454 [1st Dept 2015]; see CPLR 217[1]).