Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner challenges a determination revoking his parole based on his commission of new crimes. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the Grand Jury's determination not to indict with respect to those crimes did not collaterally estop the Parole Board from proceeding against petitioner based on those crimes ( see, Matter of McWhinney v Russi, 228 A.D.2d 980; People ex rel. Pickett v. Ruffo, 96 A.D.2d 128, 130-131; People ex rel. West v. Vincent, 46 A.D.2d 782; see also, Reed v. State of New York, 78 N.Y.2d 1, 8; People ex rel. Matthews v. New York State Div. of Parole, 58 N.Y.2d 196, 202-203; Matter of Dantzler v. Travis, 249 A.D.2d 841, 841-842, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 810).
We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.