Menechino v. Division of Parole
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*838Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs, on the sole ground that the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLB article 78 was barred by the four-months period of limitation prescribed (CPLB 217). The court did not reach or consider the petitioner’s argument that he had a constitutional right to be represented by counsel in a parole revocation proceeding. Our determination is, however, without prejudice to any other proceeding which the petitioner may be advised to institute.
Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Hawkins v. CoughlinNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- State v. RosadoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
- Soto v. New York State Board of ParoleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. ThompsonNew York Supreme Court · 1976
- People ex rel. Linares v. DalsheimAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.