Matter of Thompson v Annucci

Annotate this Case
Matter of Thompson v Annucci 2016 NY Slip Op 05018 Decided on June 23, 2016 Appellate Division, Third 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 and Entered: June 23, 2016
522338

[*1]In the Matter of PAUL THOMPSON, Petitioner,

v

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

Calendar Date: May 3, 2016
Before: McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Devine, Clark and Mulvey, JJ.

Paul Thompson, Romulus, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet 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 certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier III determination finding him guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the 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, and given that petitioner has been granted all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Daum v Venettozzi, 136 AD3d

1096, 1096-1097 [2016]; Matter of West v Annucci, 134 AD3d 1379, 1380 [2015]). Contrary to his request, petitioner is not entitled to be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination (see Matter of Smith v Prack, 131 AD3d 784, 784 [2015]; Matter of Streeter v Annucci, 131 AD3d 771, 772 [2015]).

McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Devine, Clark and Mulvey, JJ., concur.

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



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.