Matter of Asencio v. Martuscello
Docket 319 TP 25-01691
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Other
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 02567
- Docket
- 319 TP 25-01691
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a disciplinary determination after a tier III hearing
Summary
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department dismissed as moot a CPLR article 78 proceeding brought by petitioner Oscar Asencio challenging a Department of Corrections determination finding he violated incarcerated individual rules after a tier III hearing. The court concluded the challenge no longer presented a live controversy and cited controlling precedent on mootness. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition without costs and did not reach the merits of the disciplinary determination.
Issues Decided
- Whether the Article 78 challenge to the prison disciplinary determination remained a live controversy or was moot
- Whether dismissal as moot was appropriate under controlling precedent
Court's Reasoning
The court determined the petition presented no live controversy and therefore was moot, relying on established precedent that requires dismissal of matters that no longer present an actual dispute. Because mootness disposed of the case, the court did not address the merits of the disciplinary findings. The court followed Matter of Free v Coombe as the controlling authority for dismissal of moot challenges.
Authorities Cited
- Matter of Free v Coombe234 AD2d 996 (4th Dept 1996)
Parties
- Petitioner
- Oscar Asencio
- Respondent
- Daniel F. Martuscello, III, Commissioner, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision
- Attorney
- Norman P. Effman (of counsel for petitioner, Attica Legal Aid Bureau)
- Attorney
- Rachel Raimondi (of counsel for respondent, Letitia James, Attorney General)
- Judge
- Lindley, J.P.
- Judge
- Bannister, J.
- Judge
- Montour, J.
- Judge
- Greenwood, J.
- Judge
- Hannah, J.
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-24
- Transfer order entered (Supreme Court, Wyoming County)
- 2025-10-02
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult counsel about collateral consequences
If petitioner believes collateral consequences of the disciplinary finding persist, he should consult counsel to determine whether an exception to mootness applies and whether further review is available.
- 2
Confirm termination of relief sought
Petitioner or counsel should verify whether any requested relief has been rendered unnecessary and document the reasons the matter is moot in case of future proceedings.
- 3
Consider alternative remedies
If relief is still needed, explore other administrative or legal avenues, such as filing a new timely challenge if circumstances change.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court dismissed the petition as moot, so it did not review the substance of the prison disciplinary finding.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The immediate effect is on petitioner Oscar Asencio and the Department of Corrections; the dismissal ends this particular legal challenge.
- What does 'moot' mean here?
- It means there is no longer a live legal controversy for the court to decide, so the court will not rule on the underlying claims.
- Can this be appealed?
- Dismissals as moot are typically final for the issues presented; a party may seek further review only if there is a viable basis such as a collateral consequence or an exception to mootness.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
Matter of Asencio v Martuscello - 2026 NY Slip Op 02567 Matter of Asencio v Martuscello 2026 NY Slip Op 02567 April 24, 2026 Appellate Division, Fourth Department IN THE MATTER OF OSCAR ASENCIO, PETITIONER, v DANIEL F. MARTUSCELLO, III, COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT. Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department Decided on April 24, 2026 319 TP 25-01691 Present: Lindley, J.P., Bannister, Montour, Greenwood, And Hannah, JJ. WYOMING COUNTY-ATTICA LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (NORMAN P. EFFMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER. LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (RACHEL RAIMONDI OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County [Donald G. O'Geen, A.J.], entered October 2, 2025) to review a determination of respondent. The determination found after a tier III hearing that petitioner had violated various incarcerated individual rules. It is hereby ORDERED that said proceeding is unanimously dismissed without costs as moot ( see Matter of Free v Coombe , 234 AD2d 996, 996 [4th Dept 1996]). Entered: April 24, 2026 Ann Dillon Flynn