Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
We find no merit to the petitioner's contention that the Board of Parole should be held in contempt for failing to comply with the judgment dated October 31, 1991. In April 1992 the petitioner received a de novo review, resulting in a determination by the Board of Parole which complied with the requirements of the judgment of the Supreme Court. The petitioner's application to have the Board held in...
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.