Opinion
May 1, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Donovan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The appellant contends that the petition should be dismissed under the mootness doctrine since the petitioner was afforded the relief requested during the pendency of the appeal. We disagree. Inasmuch as the petitioner regained his prior status only by virtue of the State's compliance with the order under review, the underlying petition is not academic (cf., Matter of Adams v LeFevre, 135 A.D.2d 1054; Matter of Gonzalez v Jones, 115 A.D.2d 849). We have examined the parties' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.