Pressley v Bartlett

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Pressley v Bartlett 2017 NY Slip Op 31776(U) August 24, 2017 Supreme Court, Seneca County Docket Number: 51359 Judge: Dennis F. Bender Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [* 1] STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SENECA The State of New York, on relation of RAHSAAN PRESSLEY DIN# 16R0314 Petitioner DECISION AND JUDGMENT Index No. 51359 -againstRICKEY BARTLETT, SUPERINTENDENT OF WILLARD DRUG TREATMENT CAMPUS; and the CHAIRPERSON OF THE NYS BOARD OF PAROLE, Respondents The relator, Rahsaan Pressley, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging he was not transferred in a timely manner following his final parole revocation hearing which resulted in him being revoked on parole but restored subject to successful completion of the Willard Drug Treatment Campus Program. Based upon the petition, it appears the petitioner's parole was revoked and he was restored to parole supervision on May 9, 2017. On May 22, 2017, he was transferred to a DOCCS correctional facility and thereafter was transferred to the Willard Drug Treatment Campus on June 13, 2017, 34 days later. In accordance with this Court's Decision dated May 15, 2006, in People ex rel. Michael Johnson. et al., this Court finds that the petitioner was in fact transferred to the Willard Drug Treatment Campus in a timely manner, that being within 40 days, and therefore, he is not entitled to writ relief on this basis. Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby [* 2] ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that the petition is in all respects denied and dismissed, without costs beyond the initial filing fee. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. ,v\.. DA TED: t:-i'' day of August 2017 1;fi HON. DENNIS F BENDER Acting Supreme ourt Justice

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.