From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tambadou v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 9, 2017
151 A.D.3d 1699 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

06-09-2017

In the Matter of Ebrima TAMBADOU, Petitioner, v. Anthony ANNUCCI, Acting Commissioner, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

Wyoming County–Attica Legal Aid Bureau, Warsaw (Leah R. Nowotarski of Counsel), for petitioner. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Kathleen M. Treasure of Counsel), for respondent.


Wyoming County–Attica Legal Aid Bureau, Warsaw (Leah R. Nowotarski of Counsel), for petitioner.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Kathleen M. Treasure of Counsel), for respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination revoking his release to parole supervision. We reject petitioner's contention that Supreme Court erred in transferring the proceeding to this Court. A review of the petition shows that petitioner is challenging whether there was substantial evidence at the hearing to support the determination (see CPLR 7803[4] ; 7804[g]; see generally Matter of Patterson v. Fischer, 104 A.D.3d 1218, 1219, 960 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

" ‘[I]t is well settled that a determination to revoke parole will be confirmed if the procedural requirements were followed and there is evidence [that], if credited, would support such determination’ " (Matter of Wilson v. Evans, 104 A.D.3d 1190, 1190, 960 N.Y.S.2d 807 ). We conclude that the determination that petitioner violated the conditions of his parole is supported by substantial evidence (see generally id. at 1190–1191, 960 N.Y.S.2d 807 ). In making that determination, the Administrative Law Judge was entitled to credit the testimony of respondent's witnesses and reject petitioner's version of the events (see Matter of Mosley v. Dennison, 30 A.D.3d 975, 976, 816 N.Y.S.2d 789, lv. denied 7 NY3d 712, 824 N.Y.S.2d 603, 857 N.E.2d 1134 ).

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, TROUTMAN, and SCUDDER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tambadou v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 9, 2017
151 A.D.3d 1699 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Tambadou v. Annucci

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Ebrima TAMBADOU, Petitioner, v. Anthony ANNUCCI, Acting…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 9, 2017

Citations

151 A.D.3d 1699 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
151 A.D.3d 1699

Citing Cases

Bidwell v. Stanford

" ‘[I]t is well settled that a determination to revoke parole will be confirmed if the procedural…

Bidwell v. Stanford

" [I]t is well settled that a determination to revoke parole will be confirmed if the procedural requirements…