From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Macklin v. Travis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 821 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

July 20, 2000.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Torraca, J.), entered March 9, 2000 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.

McArthur Macklin, Coxsackie, appellant in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Julie M. Sheridan of counsel), Albany, for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Petitioner, an inmate serving a prison term of 5 to 15 years for his conviction of manslaughter in the first degree, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding following the denial of his request for parole release. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, prompting this appeal.

We affirm. Inasmuch as the Board of Parole considered all relevant factors in rendering its determination, including the instant offense, petitioner's criminal history, his accomplishments while incarcerated and his receipt of an earned eligibility certificate, it cannot be said that the Board of Parole's determination was irrational or arbitrary and capricious (see, Matter of Cornejo v. New York State Div. of Parole, 269 A.D.2d 713, 704 N.Y.S.2d 517). Notwithstanding petitioner's receipt of an earned eligibility certificate, the Board was not precluded, even under the circumstances of this case, from determining that there was a reasonable probability that petitioner could not remain at liberty without violating the law and that his release would not be compatible with the welfare of society (see, Matter of Howard v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 270 A.D.2d 539, 704 N.Y.S.2d 326; Matter of Dorato v. New York State Div. of Parole, 264 A.D.2d 885). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim that he was denied access to confidential information, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Macklin v. Travis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 821 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Macklin v. Travis

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF McARTHUR MACKLIN, Appellant, v. BRION D. TRAVIS, as…

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

Date published: Jul 20, 2000

Citations

274 A.D.2d 821 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
711 N.Y.S.2d 915

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Erdheim v. Travis

If a Board determination complies with applicable statutory requirements, it is not subject to judicial…