From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Menechino v. Division of Parole

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 26, 1970
26 N.Y.2d 837 (N.Y. 1970)

Summary

In Matter of Menechino v. Division of Parole (26 N.Y.2d 837, 838), the Court of Appeals held that an article 78 proceeding commenced in July, 1968 to review a revocation of parole in May, 1965 was "barred by the four-months period of limitation prescribed" by CPLR 217.

Summary of this case from Matter of Soto v. New York St. Bd. of Parole

Opinion

Argued December 3, 1969

Decided February 26, 1970

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, THOMAS C. CHIMERA, J.

David Rosenberg and Leonard B. Boudin for appellant.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General ( Hillel Hoffman and Samuel A. Hirshowitz of counsel), for respondents.


Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs, on the sole ground that the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 was barred by the four-months period of limitation prescribed (CPLR 217). The court did not reach or consider the petitioner's argument that he had a constitutional right to be represented by counsel in a parole revocation proceeding. Our determination is, however, without prejudice to any other proceeding which the petitioner may be advised to institute.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.


Summaries of

Matter of Menechino v. Division of Parole

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 26, 1970
26 N.Y.2d 837 (N.Y. 1970)

In Matter of Menechino v. Division of Parole (26 N.Y.2d 837, 838), the Court of Appeals held that an article 78 proceeding commenced in July, 1968 to review a revocation of parole in May, 1965 was "barred by the four-months period of limitation prescribed" by CPLR 217.

Summary of this case from Matter of Soto v. New York St. Bd. of Parole

In Matter of Menechino v. Division of Parole (26 N.Y.2d 837) the Court of Appeals held that an article 78 proceeding, brought under claims similar to those made in this case, was time-barred.

Summary of this case from People ex Rel. Warren v. Mancusi
Case details for

Matter of Menechino v. Division of Parole

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOSEPH MENECHINO, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF PAROLE, NEW…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 26, 1970

Citations

26 N.Y.2d 837 (N.Y. 1970)
309 N.Y.S.2d 585
258 N.E.2d 84

Citing Cases

People ex Rel. Menechino v. Warden

It is enough to say that that proceeding was dismissed on the ground that it had been commenced beyond the…

Matter of Hunter v. N.Y. State Bd. of Parole

We affirm. The instant proceeding, commenced roughly two years after petitioner received notice of the…