IN RE: JOSEPH ROESCH (2025)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner, who is civilly confined at a facility operated by respondent New York State Office of Mental Health (OMH) pursuant to article 10 of the Mental Hygiene Law, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul a determination that denied his objections to restrictions placed on his ability to correspond with certain individuals, including incarcerated individuals and registered sex offenders, as well as to a requirement that his nonlegal outgoing mail be left unsealed so that his treatment team could ensure that he was not corresponding with individuals on the restricted list. Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition.

We reject petitioner's contention that the restrictions violate Mental Hygiene Law § 33.02 (b). We further reject petitioner's contention that the determination is arbitrary and capricious (see generally Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 230-231 [1974]). “In the context of civilly confined individuals, administrative decisions ․ will not be considered arbitrary or capricious when they have ‘a sound basis in reason and [are] supported by legitimate concerns regarding the security of the institution and the welfare of the residents therein’ ” (Matter of Pratt v New York State Off. of Mental Health, 153 AD3d 1065, 1066 [3d Dept 2017]; see Matter of Brown v Sawyer, 85 AD3d 1614, 1615-1616 [4th Dept 2011]). Here, petitioner's medical records provide a rational basis to support OMH's conclusion that the restrictions were imposed for legitimate treatment reasons to support petitioner's welfare.

We have reviewed petitioner's remaining contentions and conclude that none requires reversal or modification of the judgment.

Entered: November 21, 2025

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court