From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Travis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 4, 2002
293 A.D.2d 800 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

90369

April 4, 2002.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Nolan Jr., J.), entered July 17, 2001 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner's request for parole release.

Donald Jones, Wallkill, appellant pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General, Albany (William E. Storrs of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Carpinello and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Petitioner is currently serving an aggregate prison term of 8 to 25 years following his conviction of the crimes of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree and burglary in the first degree arising out of the June 1988 beating of his estranged wife. At that time, petitioner entered his wife's residence in violation of a court order of protection and beat her with a lamp and a knife, rendering her comatose for one month and leaving her with permanent brain damage and partial paralysis. After the Board of Parole's most recent determination denying him parole release, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 review proceeding. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and we now affirm.

The record discloses that in denying petitioner's request for parole release, the Board considered the relevant factors required by Executive Law § 259-i, including his positive accomplishments in prison, before concluding that petitioner is not an acceptable candidate for release due to the serious and violent nature of his crime and his failure to articulate either remorse or insight into the nature thereof (see, Matter of Surace v. New York State Div. of Parole, 265 A.D.2d 769; Matter of Morales v. Travis, 260 A.D.2d 710). In view of petitioner's failure to demonstrate that the Board's determination was affected by "a showing of irrationality bordering on impropriety" (Matter of Russo v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 N.Y.2d 69, 77), we perceive no reason to disturb the determination under review (see, Matter of Hernandez v. McSherry, 271 A.D.2d 777, 778, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 769; Matter of Jerrell v. Ibsen, 253 A.D.2d 917). There is, in addition, no support for petitioner's contention that the Board automatically rejected his application in order to comply with what he asserts is the Governor's policy against releasing violent felons on parole. The remaining contentions raised herein have been examined and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Jones v. Travis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 4, 2002
293 A.D.2d 800 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Jones v. Travis

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DONALD JONES, Appellant, v. BRION TRAVIS, as Chair of the…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Apr 4, 2002

Citations

293 A.D.2d 800 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 656

Citing Cases

Swindell v. N.Y. State Bd. of Parole

The record does not support petitioner's assertion that the decision was predetermined consistent with an…

Matter of Shark v. New York State Div. of Parole

Moreover, the record does not support petitioner's assertion that the decision was predetermined consistent…