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: Jose MORRERO, Appellant, v. Robert DENNISON, as Chair of the New York State Board of Parole, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (McNamara, J.), entered October 12, 2004 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.
While on parole supervision, petitioner committed an armed robbery and was convicted in 1990 of robbery in the second degree, for which he was sentenced as a persistent felony offender to a prison term of eight years to life. He made his fourth appearance before the Board of Parole in August 2003. At the conclusion of the interview, the Board denied his request for release and ordered him held for an additional 24 months. The decision was upheld on administrative appeal. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the Board's decision. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, resulting in this appeal.
We affirm. Notwithstanding the receipt of a certificate of earned eligibility, the Board is justified in denying parole release where it concludes, based upon a review of the relevant statutory factors, that the inmate's release is not compatible with the welfare of society or that the inmate will not be able to live and remain at liberty without violating the law, if released (see Matter of Rivera v. Travis, 289 A.D.2d 829, 830, 734 N.Y.S.2d 506 [2001]; Matter of Fuller v. New York State Bd. of Parole, 284 A.D.2d 853, 854, 726 N.Y.S.2d 600 [2001]; see also Executive Law § 259-i [1] [a]; [2][c][A] ). Inasmuch as the Board's decision does not evince “ ‘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] ), we find no reason to disturb it.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
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: June 30, 2005
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)