Matter of Cobb v Sheahan

Annotate this Case
Matter of Cobb v Sheahan 2015 NY Slip Op 09717 Decided on December 31, 2015 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 December 31, 2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
1245 CA 14-00431

[*1]IN THE MATTER OF ROOSEVELT COBB, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

v

MICHAEL SHEAHAN, SUPERINTENDENT, FIVE POINTS CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.



ROOSEVELT COBB, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (MARCUS J. MASTRACCO OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Seneca County (Dennis F. Bender, A.J.), entered December 26, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment denied and dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition challenging his sentence as calculated by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS). Contrary to petitioner's contention, we conclude that DOCCS correctly computed his sentence and, thus, Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition (see generally Matter of Williams v Annucci, 131 AD3d 1329, 1330-1331). To the extent that petitioner contends that he was denied the benefit of his plea bargain, his remedy is to seek relief by way of a motion pursuant to CPL article 440 (see Matter of Cristostomo v Fischer, 93 AD3d 976, 977).

Entered: December 31, 2015

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court