¶1Judgment unanimously reversed and petition dismissed. Memorandum: In this CPLR article 78 proceeding respondent appeals from a judgment granting petitioner a de novo parole release hearing. Supreme Court held that a new hearing is required because the Parole Board’s decision fails to recite that consideration was given to the factors enumerated in the applicable statute (see Executive Law, § 259-i, subd 2, par [c]). We reverse. The record of the parole release hearing demonstrates that the board had before it all of the information required by the statute to be considered, and the decision set forth in detail the board’s reasons for denying parole (see Executive Law, § 259-i, subd 2, par [a]; Matter Collins v 52 NY2d 798). from of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Fudeman, J. — art 78.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer, Green and O’Donnell, JJ.
99 A.D.2d 644
Rice v. Hammock
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 27, 1984
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1984-01-27
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1984-01-27
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 2014
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →