Rodriguez v. Annucci
| Decision Date | 25 June 2015 |
| Docket Number | 519842 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Richard RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
129 A.D.3d 1417
12 N.Y.S.3d 371
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 05544
In the Matter of Richard RODRIGUEZ, Appellant
v.
Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
519842
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
June 25, 2015.
Richard Rodriguez, Wallkill, appellant pro se.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Kathleen M. Treasure of counsel), for respondent.
Before: McCARTHY, J.P., GARRY, LYNCH and DEVINE, JJ.
Opinion
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Gilpatric, J.), entered August 7, 2014 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying his request to participate in the family reunion program.
In 1998, petitioner was convicted of a number of crimes, the most serious of which was murder in the first degree, after he violently assaulted, strangled and stabbed a female acquaintance, resulting in her death (Rodriguez v. Smith, 485 F.Supp.2d 368, 373 [S.D.N.Y.2007] ). He was sentenced to a term of life in prison. During his incarceration, he got married and, in December 2012, he applied to participate in the family reunion program. Because he was designated a central monitoring case, his application was subject to special review (see 7 NYCRR 220.2 [c][1][i] ). Upon such review, his application was denied and the denial was upheld on administrative appeal. Petitioner
commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the denial and, following joinder of issue, Supreme Court dismissed the petition. This appeal ensued.
Initially, it is to be noted that participation in a family reunion program is a privilege, not a right (see Matter of Rodriguez v. Morris, 113 A.D.3d 1011,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gordon v. Morris
...782, 518 N.E.2d 536 [1987], cert. denied 488 U.S. 879, 109 S.Ct. 196, 102 L.Ed.2d 166 [1988] ; see Matter of Rodriguez v. Annucci, 129 A.D.3d 1417, 1418, 12 N.Y.S.3d 371 [2015] ). Notably, “[p]rior participation 144 A.D.3d 1339in the program does not guarantee that a future application will......
-
Marshall v. N.Y.S. Dep't of Corr., 525848
...for respondent's denial of petitioner's request to participate in the family reunion program (see e.g. Matter of Rodriguez v. Annucci, 129 A.D.3d 1417, 1418, 12 N.Y.S.3d 371 [2015] ). Petitioner's remaining arguments, to the extent not specifically addressed, have been examined and found to......
-
Mays v. Morris
...N.Y.S.2d 782, 518 N.E.2d 536 [1987], cert. denied 488 U.S. 879, 109 S.Ct. 196, 102 L.Ed.2d 166 [1988] ; Matter of Rodriguez v. Annucci, 129 A.D.3d 1417, 1418, 12 N.Y.S.3d 371 [2015] ). The determination of whether an inmate may participate is "heavily discretionary" and will be upheld if it......
-
In re Sciortino
...an Administrative Law Judge following a hearing. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, however, reversed and found that claimant was 12 N.Y.S.3d 371entitled to receive benefits. The employer now appeals. “ ‘Whether a claimant has good cause to leave his or her employment is a factual det......