Opinion
February 13, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Kristin Booth Glen, J.).
The record supports the conclusion of the IAS Court that, in denying petitioner's application for parole after the February and March hearings, respondent improperly considered factors outside the scope of Executive Law § 259-i and in violation of a prior court order. However, while we share the IAS Court's concern over respondent's failure, after three attempts, to provide petitioner with a fair hearing, the proper remedy is to remand the matter for a de novo hearing before a different panel rather than to order petitioner's release on parole ( see, Matter of King v. New York State Div. of Parole, 83 N.Y.2d 788).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rubin, Ross and Tom, JJ.