Matter of Guiffre v Annucci

Matter of Guiffre v Annucci 2016 NY Slip Op 06014 Decided on September 15, 2016 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: September 15, 2016
520126

[*1]In the Matter of DAVID N. GUIFFRE, Petitioner,

v

ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

Calendar Date: August 8, 2016
Before: Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose, Devine and Mulvey, JJ.

David N. Guiffre, Willard, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. The Attorney General has advised this Court that such determination has since been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record and the $5 mandatory surcharge has been refunded to petitioner's inmate account. In view of this, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Williams v Venettozzi, 140 AD3d 1508, 1508 [2016]; Matter of

Robinson v Prack, 137 AD3d 1452, 1452 [2016]). Although petitioner seeks to be restored to the status that he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination, he is not entitled to this relief (see Matter of Thompson v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1521, 1521 [2016]; Matter of Khudan v Annucci, 139 AD3d 1198, 1198 [2016]). We note, however, that any loss of good time that was imposed as part of the penalty should be restored to petitioner (see Matter of Zoccoli v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1512, 1513 [2016]; Matter of Clark v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision, 138 AD3d 1331, 1332 [2016]).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose, Devine and Mulvey, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.