History
  • No items yet
midpage
125 AD3d 1029
N.Y. App. Div. 3rd
2015

Matter of Laliveres v Prack

Appellate Division, Third Department, New York

February 5, 2015

2015 NY Slip Op 00939 | 125 AD3d 1029

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, April 1, 2015.

Rashid Laliveres, Dannemora, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a disciplinary determination finding him guilty of drug use. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed, all references thereto expunged from petitioner‘s institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge refunded to his inmate account. We note that, although not referenced in the letter from the Attorney General, “any loss of good time incurred by petitioner as a result of the determination should be restored” (Matter of Benitez v Fischer, 118 AD3d 1237, 1238 [2014] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). Otherwise, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and this proceeding is dismissed as moot (see Matter of Canales-Sanchez v Schneiderman, 107 AD3d 1258, 1259 [2013]).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Lynch and Devine, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Case Details

Case Name: Matter of Laliveres v Prack
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Third Department
Date Published: Feb 5, 2015
Citations: 125 AD3d 1029; 2015 NY Slip Op 00939; 519046
Docket Number: 519046
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div. 3rd
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Log In