Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Anibal ORTIZ, Appellant, v. Robert DENNISON, as Chair of the New York State Board of Parole, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Devine, J.), entered August 22, 2007 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner's request for parole release.
Petitioner was convicted of, among other crimes, sodomy in the second degree. As a result, he was sentenced to 2 to 6 years in prison. In May 2006, petitioner made his first appearance before the Board of Parole seeking parole release. The Board denied his request and ordered him held for an additional 24 months. Petitioner then exhausted his administrative remedies and commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding. Following joinder of issue, Supreme Court dismissed the petition. Petitioner now appeals.
We affirm. Our review of the record confirms that, in denying petitioner's application for parole release, the Board considered the pertinent statutory factors (see Executive Law § 259-i[2][c][A] ). In addition to the seriousness of petitioner's criminal conduct and his failure to accept responsibility for that conduct, the Board took into account petitioner's lack of a criminal history, as well as his institutional record and postrelease plans (see Matter of Pitts v. Dennison, 40 A.D.3d 1184, 1185, 834 N.Y.S.2d 587 [2007] ). Accordingly, inasmuch as petitioner's remaining contentions, to the extent preserved, are unavailing, we conclude that the Board's decision does not exhibit “ ‘irrationality bordering on impropriety’ ” (Matter of Silmon v. Travis, 95 N.Y.2d 470, 476, 718 N.Y.S.2d 704, 741 N.E.2d 501 [2000], quoting Matter of Russo v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 N.Y.2d 69, 77, 427 N.Y.S.2d 982, 405 N.E.2d 225 [1980] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 11, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)