Opinion
No. 200 SSM 27.
Decided September 16, 2008.
APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered March 11, 2008. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.; op 2006 NY Slip Op 30377 [U]), entered in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which had denied the petition to annul the Parole Board's determination denying petitioner's parole request.
Matter of Siao-Pao v Dennison, 51 AD3d 105, affirmed.
Feinman Grossbard, PC, White Plains ( Steven N. Feinman of counsel), for appellant, and Leopold Siao-Pao, appellant pro se.
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York City ( Robert C. Weisz of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO, READ, SMITH, PIGOTT and JONES.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
The courts below applied the correct legal standards and properly considered the Board of Parole's written determination, which, when evaluated in the context of the parole hearing transcript, demonstrated that the Board considered the required statutory factors ( see Executive Law § 259-i; Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 476). The Board's written determination, while less detailed than it might be, is not merely "conelusory" and so does not violate Executive Law § 259-i (2) (a) (i).
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.