People ex rel. Coldwell v. New York State Div. of Parole

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Writing for the CourtBefore THOMPSON
Citation506 N.Y.S.2d 761,123 A.D.2d 458
Decision Date29 September 1986
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., ex rel. Larry COLDWELL, Respondent, v. NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF PAROLE, et al., Appellants.

Page 761

506 N.Y.S.2d 761
123 A.D.2d 458
The PEOPLE, etc., ex rel. Larry COLDWELL, Respondent,
v.
NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF PAROLE, et al., Appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division,
Second Department.
Sept. 29, 1986.

Page 762

Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen., New York City (Gerald J. Ryan and Charles C. Davis, Jr., of counsel), for appellants.

Edward D. Wilford, New York City (Harold B. Ramsey, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.

Before THOMPSON, J.P., and RUBIN, EIBER and SPATT, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a habeas corpus proceeding, the New York State Division of Parole and the Superintendent of the Queensboro Correctional Facility appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), dated December 10, 1985, as directed the State Division of Parole to hold a hearing separate and apart from, and prior to, the final parole revocation hearing to determine the admissibility of evidence to be received at the final parole revocation hearing.

Judgment reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.

The petitioner was released to parole supervision on May 24, 1982. On October 18, 1985, a parole violation warrant was executed against the petitioner, and he was served with written notice of the charges. A preliminary hearing was held on October 25, 1985, at which the petitioner sought suppression of certain physical evidence on the ground that the evidence was obtained by means of an unlawful search. The hearing officer would not entertain the motion on the ground that a parole revocation hearing was not the proper forum for such a motion, and that only a court had the authority to determine a suppression motion. The preliminary hearing was concluded, and probable cause to believe that the petitioner had violated the conditions of his parole was found.

On or about November 7, 1985, the petitioner commenced the instant habeas corpus proceeding, seeking to be released from custody on the ground that the evidence presented at the preliminary hearing was the product of an unreasonable and illegal search. The Supreme Court, Queens County, dismissed the petition and the writ, but ordered the State Division of Parole to hold a hearing prior to the final revocation hearing to determine the admissibility of the evidence to be received at the final hearing. At no time were any criminal...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Barbour v. People
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 18 November 1994
    ...was brought by petitioner via writ of habeas corpus, which is governed by the CPLR. In People ex rel. Coldwell v. N.Y.S. Div. of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458, 459-60, 506 N.Y.S.2d 761, the court held that it was improper to order the Division of Parole to conduct a suppression hearing. This was s......
  • People ex rel. Vasquez v. Warden, No. 252776–09.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 13 August 2010
    ...being brought against him for possessing the knife and the box cutter. People ex rel. Coldwell v. New York State Division of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458, 459, 506 N.Y.S.2d 761 (2nd Dept.1986)[citing People ex rel. Robertson v. Division of Parole, 67 N.Y.2d 197 [1986]]. The issue before this cour......
  • People v. Travis, 01-00858
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 9 November 2001
    ...v New York State Div. of Parole, 240 A.D.2d 415, 416, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 808; People ex rel. Coldwell v New York State Div. of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458). Petitioner is incarcerated awaiting a final parole revocation hearing and, under the circumstances of this case, is entitled to a determin......
  • People ex rel. Taylor v. Vierno, No. 260531–2011.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 23 December 2011
    ...evidentiary admissibility at the final parole hearing (see generally, People ex rel. Coldwell v. New York State Div. of Parole, 506 N.Y.S.2d 761 [2nd Dept.1986] ). Petitioner seeks a Mapp hearing 1 to determine admissibility of the physical evidence seized and transported from his home by p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Barbour v. People
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 18 November 1994
    ...was brought by petitioner via writ of habeas corpus, which is governed by the CPLR. In People ex rel. Coldwell v. N.Y.S. Div. of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458, 459-60, 506 N.Y.S.2d 761, the court held that it was improper to order the Division of Parole to conduct a suppression hearing. This was s......
  • People ex rel. Vasquez v. Warden, No. 252776–09.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 13 August 2010
    ...being brought against him for possessing the knife and the box cutter. People ex rel. Coldwell v. New York State Division of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458, 459, 506 N.Y.S.2d 761 (2nd Dept.1986)[citing People ex rel. Robertson v. Division of Parole, 67 N.Y.2d 197 [1986]]. The issue before this cour......
  • People v. Travis, 01-00858
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 9 November 2001
    ...v New York State Div. of Parole, 240 A.D.2d 415, 416, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 808; People ex rel. Coldwell v New York State Div. of Parole, 123 A.D.2d 458). Petitioner is incarcerated awaiting a final parole revocation hearing and, under the circumstances of this case, is entitled to a determin......
  • People ex rel. Taylor v. Vierno, No. 260531–2011.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 23 December 2011
    ...evidentiary admissibility at the final parole hearing (see generally, People ex rel. Coldwell v. New York State Div. of Parole, 506 N.Y.S.2d 761 [2nd Dept.1986] ). Petitioner seeks a Mapp hearing 1 to determine admissibility of the physical evidence seized and transported from his home by p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT