From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shearer v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 17, 2009
65 A.D.3d 1403 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 505342.

September 17, 2009.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Cahill, J.), entered August 12, 2008 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, dismissed the petition as moot.

Larry Shearer, Marcy, appellant pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Martin Hotvet of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Spain, Rose, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur.


Petitioner, an inmate at Mid-State Correctional Facility in Oneida County, received a misbehavior report that charged him with possessing prohibited articles and refusing a direct order after a search of his cell revealed pornographic photographs which he was prohibited from having based upon his participation in a sex offender program. Following a tier I disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty and was given a seven-day work detail and 13 days loss of recreation, and removed from the sex offender program. After an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced the instant CPLR article 78 proceeding and respondent moved to dismiss the petition. Supreme Court granted the motion and dismissed the petition. Petitioner now appeals and we affirm.

We agree with Supreme Court that, because the Attorney General has submitted an affidavit attesting that all references to the determination against petitioner have been expunged from his record by operation of law ( see 7 NYCRR 252.5 [d]), his challenge has been rendered moot because he has received all of the relief to which he is entitled ( see Matter of Gathers v Artus, 59 AD3d 795; Matter of Purcell v McKoy, 54 AD3d 1113, 1114). To the extent that petitioner argues that the challenge is not moot because he has not been reinstated to the sex offender program and, as a result, has been denied a certificate of earned eligibility, we note that "inmates have no constitutional or statutory rights to their prior housing or programming status" ( Matter of Grant v Fischer, 63 AD3d 1398, 1399; see Matter of Howard v Miller, 193 AD2d 988, 989).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Shearer v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 17, 2009
65 A.D.3d 1403 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Shearer v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of LARRY SHEARER, Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF…

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

Date published: Sep 17, 2009

Citations

65 A.D.3d 1403 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 6474
885 N.Y.S.2d 136

Citing Cases

Sweeper v. Fischer

We affirm. Initially, we note that petitioner's challenge to the tier I determination is moot given that the…

Cox v. Fischer

As a result, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and this matter must be dismissed…