Matter of Lawrence Dawkins v John Burge
Annotate this Case
Matter of Dawkins v Burge
2003 NY Slip Op 18643 [1 AD3d 1064]
Decided on November 21, 2003
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT, KEHOE, AND HAYES, JJ.
1285 TP 03-00099
[*1]MATTER OF LAWRENCE DAWKINS, PETITIONER, ORDER
v
JOHN BURGE, SUPERINTENDENT, AUBURN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, RESPONDENT.
CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Corning, J.), entered January 8, 2003, seeking review of a determination of respondent after a Tier III hearing.
LAWRENCE DAWKINS, PETITIONER PRO SE.
ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (ANDREA OSER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT, KEHOE, AND HAYES, JJ.
1285 TP 03-00099
[*1]MATTER OF LAWRENCE DAWKINS, PETITIONER, ORDER
v
JOHN BURGE, SUPERINTENDENT, AUBURN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, RESPONDENT.
CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Corning, J.), entered January 8, 2003, seeking review of a determination of respondent after a Tier III hearing.
LAWRENCE DAWKINS, PETITIONER PRO SE.
ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (ANDREA OSER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
