From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bennett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2002
296 A.D.2d 835 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

717 KAH 00-02635

July 3, 2002.

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Stone, J.), entered April 24, 2000, which denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

D.J. J.A. CIRANDO, ESQS., SYRACUSE (JOHN A. CIRANDO OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

Before: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., HAYES, HURLBUTT, SCUDDER, AND BURNS, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:

Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Supreme Court properly denied the petition on the merits. Petitioner's contention with respect to the propriety of the preliminary parole revocation hearing was "subsumed by revocation of petitioner's parole" ( People ex rel. Chavis v. McCoy, 236 A.D.2d 892, 892 [internal quotation marks omitted]). Further, petitioner pleaded guilty to one of the violations charged, and thus there is no merit to his contention that the Division of Parole failed to meet its burden of establishing the violation by a preponderance of the evidence to warrant revocation of his parole ( see 9 NYCRR 8005.20 [b]; Matter of Montanez v. New York State Div. of Parole, 227 A.D.2d 753, 753-754, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 814; cf. Matter of McCloud v. New York State Div. of Parole, 277 A.D.2d 627, 628, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 702; Matter of Carney v. New York State Div. of Parole, 244 A.D.2d 746, 746). Petitioner has failed to specify the parole violations with which he was originally charged and the violations considered at the preliminary parole revocation hearing, nor does the record so specify. We therefore are unable to review the further contentions of petitioner that he was improperly confronted with additional charges at the preliminary parole revocation hearing without prior notice and that his sentence, which was the result of a plea bargain, was "arbitrary and improper" ( see generally People ex rel. Ayers v. Lombard, 87 Misc.2d 355, 358-359, affd 55 A.D.2d 1051, lv denied 41 N.Y.2d 804).


Summaries of

People v. Bennett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2002
296 A.D.2d 835 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Bennett

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK EX REL. ANTHONY M. CAMPOLITO…

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

Date published: Jul 3, 2002

Citations

296 A.D.2d 835 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
744 N.Y.S.2d 752