YOURDON, LOUIS v. SEMRAU, PAROLE OFFICER MARTIN ( 2015 )

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 1196 CA 15-00507 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK EX REL. LOUIS YOURDON, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PAROLE OFFICER MARTIN SEMRAU, NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF PAROLE, TINA M. STANFORD, CHAIRWOMAN OF PAROLE BOARD, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, ANTHONY ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, AND PAUL CHAPPIUS, SUPERINTENDENT, ELMIRA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. LOUIS ROSADO, BUFFALO, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (BRIAN D. GINSBERG OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. Appeal from a judgment (denominated order and judgment) of the Supreme Court, Livingston County (Dennis S. Cohen, A.J.) entered December 18, 2014 in a habeas corpus proceeding. The judgment dismissed the petition. It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he sought release from state prison on various grounds. While this appeal was pending, however, petitioner was released to parole supervision, thereby rendering this appeal moot (see People ex rel. Anderson v James, 125 AD3d 1329, 1330; People ex rel. Moore v Lempke, 101 AD3d 1665, 1665-1666, lv denied 20 NY3d 863). Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see People ex rel. Baron v New York State Dept. of Corr., 94 AD3d 1410, 1410, lv denied 19 NY3d 807; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715). Entered: November 20, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court