AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

In the Matter of COUNTY OF ONONDAGA et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES et al., Respondents.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Petitioners commenced this proceeding seeking relief in the nature of mandamus to compel respondents to accept sentenced prisoners within a specified period of time. Respondents concede that CPL 430.20 (subd 1) imposes upon them a clear legal obligation to accept sentenced prisoners "forthwith" ( Crespo v Hall, 56 N.Y.2d 856), but urge that this mandate has not been violated in the present case. We agree that, on this record, which indicates only that the relevant delays in accepting prisoners amount to an average of six days, petitioners have failed to establish such a clear violation of respondents' duty as to warrant mandamus relief (contrast Crespo v Hall, supra [an action for declaratory judgment and incidental injunctive relief]).

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, MEYER, SIMONS and KAYE concur.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF ONONDAGA v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT
(Jun 5, 1984)