Krouth v. New York State Board of Parole
Opinion of the Court
Determination
Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the hearing evidence, including petitioner’s inculpatory statements to police and to his parole officer, overwhelmingly supports the parole revocation determination (see, Executive Law § 259-i [3] [f] [ix], [x]; People ex rel. Rosado v James, 134 AD2d 943, 944). Petitioner received a fair and impartial hearing, and the determination ordering him to serve the remainder of his sentence is not excessive where, by his conduct, he showed himself to be unrehabilitated and dangerously sexually aggressive. (Article 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Calvaruso, J.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.