2025 NY Slip Op 51325(U)
New York City Court2025Background
- Devon B. Smith, released on parole in May 2022, was accused of violating parole based on alleged involvement in a criminal trespass and assault in February 2024.
- The initial criminal charge was second-degree burglary, later reduced to second-degree criminal trespass, and ultimately dismissed in the interests of justice.
- At Smith’s parole revocation hearing, key evidence included a video and witness statements allegedly linking Smith to the incident, leading to two parole violation charges being sustained against him by the ALJ.
- Smith, through counsel, objected to the admission of hearsay evidence and argued the video was improperly authenticated and admitted without the victim's testimony.
- The ALJ overruled these objections, sustained the violations, and ordered Smith held until the maximum expiration of his sentence.
- Smith appealed to the Elmira City Court, arguing violations of due process and insufficient evidentiary foundation.
Issues
| Issue | Smith's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of hearsay and video evidence | Evidence was double hearsay and not properly founded; denial of right to confront | Evidence properly admitted; hearsay and video allowed at discretion in parole proceedings | Sustained: Lack of foundation; due process violation |
| Absence of victim's testimony | No good cause for not producing victim; undermined confrontation rights | Victim’s absence excused; other evidence corroborated | Sustained: No sufficient good cause shown |
| Burden of proof for sustaining violation | No clear and convincing, competent evidence beyond hearsay | Sufficient weight based on available evidence | Sustained: Insufficient evidence |
| Calculation of time on parole | ALJ miscalculated time previously served on parole | ALJ calculated based on incorrect date | Sustained: Smith was on parole 21 months |
Key Cases Cited
- Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972) (due process in parole revocation requires confrontation unless good cause shown)
- People ex rel. McGee v. Walters, 62 N.Y.2d 317 (1984) (good cause finding required for hearsay in parole proceedings)
- People v. Boyd, 97 A.D.3d 898 (3d Dep't 2012) (video evidence requires proper foundation for admission)
- Matter of Richard W. Hoch v. New York State Dep’t of Health, 1 A.D.3d 994 (4th Dep't 2003) (determination cannot rely solely on hearsay; requires corroborative evidence)