People ex rel. Griffin v. Baxter

• Decision Date: 04 August 2022
• Docket Number: 429,OP 22-00326
• Citation: 208 A.D.3d 986,173 N.Y.S.3d 87
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York EX REL. Jon GRIFFIN, Esq., on Behalf of LeRoy Reynolds, et al., Petitioner, v. Todd BAXTER, Monroe County Sheriff, and Anthony Annucci, Acting Commissioner, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

208 A.D.3d 986
173 N.Y.S.3d 87

The PEOPLE of the State of New York EX REL. Jon GRIFFIN, Esq., on Behalf of LeRoy Reynolds, et al., Petitioner,
v.
Todd BAXTER, Monroe County Sheriff, and Anthony Annucci, Acting Commissioner, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondents.

429
OP 22-00326

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

Entered: August 4, 2022

JILL L. PAPERNO, ACTING PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JONATHAN GARVIN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER.

LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ROCHESTER (KATE H. NEPVEU OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT ANTHONY ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION.

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, NEMOYER, AND BANNISTER, JJ.

173 N.Y.S.3d 89

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

208 A.D.3d 986

It is hereby ORDERED that said petition is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this original proceeding pursuant to CPLR 7002 (b) (2) seeking a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of 23 individuals (relators) who were detained before March 1, 2022, due to alleged violations of their release to parole, postrelease supervision, or conditional release. Petitioner contends that the relators are entitled to recognizance hearings, as set forth in the recently amended Executive Law § 259-i (3) (iv), and that no such hearings were held with respect to their detention; therefore, petitioner seeks an order directing respondents to hold such hearings or to release the relators from custody. Assuming, arguendo, that the exception to the mootness doctrine applies to the extent that this proceeding has been rendered moot with respect to certain relators (see generally People ex rel. McManus v. Horn , 18 N.Y.3d 660, 663-664, 944 N.Y.S.2d 448, 967 N.E.2d 671 [2012] ; People ex rel. Bradley v. Baxter , 203 A.D.3d 1576, 1576, 161 N.Y.S.3d 903 [4th Dept. 2022] ; People ex rel. Doyle v. Fischer , 159 A.D.2d 208, 208, 551 N.Y.S.2d 830 [1st Dept. 1990] ), and that the relief sought by petitioner on behalf of each relator is available in this proceeding (cf. Bradley , 203 A.D.3d at 1576, 161 N.Y.S.3d 903 ; People ex rel. Gonzalez v. Wayne County Sheriff , 96 A.D.3d 1698, 1699, 947 N.Y.S.2d 738 [4th Dept. 2012], lv denied 21 N.Y.3d 852, 2013 WL 1760829 [2013] ; see generally State of N.Y. ex rel. Harkavy v. Consilvio , 8 N.Y.3d 645, 650-652, 838 N.Y.S.2d 810, 870 N.E.2d 128 [2007] ), we conclude

208 A.D.3d 987

that petitioner's contentions lack merit. Consequently, we dismiss the petition.

"In our tripartite form of government, the legislature determines the public policy of this State, recalibrating rights and changing course when it deems such alteration appropriate as it grapples with enduring problems and rises to meet new challenges facing our communities. It is the distinct role of the courts to interpret the laws to give effect to legislative intent while safeguarding the constitutional rights of impacted individuals" ( Matter of Regina Metro. Co., LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal , 35 N.Y.3d 332, 348, 130 N.Y.S.3d 759, 154 N.E.3d 972 [2020], rearg denied 35 N.Y.3d 1079...