People, ex rel. Sloan v. New York State Bd. of Parole
| Decision Date | 24 May 1982 |
| Citation | 88 A.D.2d 666,450 N.Y.S.2d 512 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., ex rel. Walter SLOAN, Respondent, v. NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF PAROLE, et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen., New York City , for appellants.
William E. Hellerstein, New York City (Judith C. Selinger, Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondent.
Before GIBBONS, J.P., and WEINSTEIN, O'CONNOR and BOYERS, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 9, 1981, which sustained the writ of habeas corpus, vacated and dismissed the parole violation detainer warrant, annulled the declaration of delinquency and directed that petitioner be released from custody, unless he was subject to another commitment or warrant.
Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is dismissed and the detainer warrant and declaration of delinquency are reinstated. If the petitioner has been released, he is directed to surrender himself to the Superintendent of the Ossining Correctional Facility.
Petitioner waived a preliminary hearing on parole revocation charges on August 13, 1981. On October 2, 1981 counsel for the petitioner filed a notice of appearance with the Division of Parole and on October 19, 1981 counsel was advised that a final revocation hearing was scheduled for November 9, 1981, within the statutorily prescribed 90-day period (see Executive Law, § 259-i, subd. 3, par. cl. ). On October 30, 1981, because of a scheduling conflict, petitioner's attorney requested an adjournment of the final hearing from November 9, 1981 to November 18, 1981, a date beyond the 90-day period. In response to counsel's request for a postponement, the Division of Parole rescheduled the final hearing to November 30, 1981, the first available date, and properly charged the delay to the petitioner. (See 9 NYCRR 8005.17 Thus, the record indicates that there was no violation of the petitioner's right to a speedy hearing. (See, e.g., People ex rel. Kitt v. Dalsheim, 67 A.D.2d 934, 412 N.Y.S.2d 1017; People ex rel. Miranda v. Dalsheim, 70 A.D.2d 941, 417 N.Y.S.2d 513.)
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People ex rel. Walker v. New York State Bd. of Parole
...period and the adjournment for the purpose of obtaining counsel is chargeable against the petitioner (People ex rel. Sloan v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 88 A.D.2d 666, 450 N.Y.S.2d 512; People ex rel. Miranda v. Dalsheim, 70 A.D.2d 941, 417 N.Y.S.2d 513; People ex rel. Kitt v. Dalsheim, ......
-
People ex rel. Brooks v. Russi
...of the petitioner's attorney (see, People ex rel. Burton v. Russi, 199 A.D.2d 560, 606 N.Y.S.2d 31; People ex rel. Sloan v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 88 A.D.2d 666, 450 N.Y.S.2d 512). Moreover, we find no error in the ALJ's refusal to delay the final hearing until the underlying charges......
-
Picciano v. Hammock
...authorized by the statute. In our view, this latter construction of the statute is proper (see, e.g., People ex rel. Sloan v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 88 A.D.2d 666, 450 N.Y.S.2d 512; People ex rel. Goodman v. Smith, 73 A.D.2d 800, 423 N.Y.S.2d Respondents also contend that in petition......
-
People ex rel. Burton v. Russi
...521 N.Y.S.2d 657, 516 N.E.2d 194; People ex rel. Evans v. Sullivan, 141 A.D.2d 884, 530 N.Y.S.2d 210; People ex rel. Sloan v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 88 A.D.2d 666, 450 N.Y.S.2d 512). ...