Petitioner challenges his continued incarceration beyond his conditional release date on the ground that the condition imposed by the Division of Parole, requiring him to reside in an approved residence upon his release, was not met. Contrary to petitioner’s assertions, it lies within the discretion of the Division of Parole to impose special conditions that must be satisfied prior to release (see Executive Law § 259-c [2]; § 259-g [2]; 9 NYCRR 8003.2 [Z]; 8003.3; see also Matter of M.G. v Travis,
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
