Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner contends that he was entitled to a writ of habeas corpus because a Hearing Officer cut short his counsel's cross examination of the complaining witness at his parole revocation hearing. Since the petitioner failed to raise this issue in his administrative appeal, the Supreme Court properly denied the extraordinary relief of habeas corpus (see, People ex rel. Keitt v McMann...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.