Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Matter of Jose FEREIRA, Petitioner, v. Philip COOMBE, Jr., Acting Commissioner, New York State Department of Correctional Services, Respondent.
Petitioner, an inmate at Attica Correctional Facility, seeks to annul a determination that he possessed a weapon and assaulted another inmate in violation of inmate rules 113.10 and 100.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2[B][14] [i]; [1] [i]). Petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to his contention that he was denied adequate prehearing employee assistance by failing to raise it in his administrative appeal (see, Matter of Rodriguez v. Coughlin, 219 A.D.2d 876, 632 N.Y.S.2d 347; Matter of Nelson v. Coughlin, 188 A.D.2d 1071, 591 N.Y.S.2d 670, appeal dismissed 81 N.Y.2d 834, 595 N.Y.S.2d 396, 611 N.E.2d 297). We reject petitioner's further contention that the determination is not supported by substantial evidence. The hearing evidence establishes that, prior to the incident, all inmates in the cell area with the exception of petitioner had been locked in their cells and that petitioner was the only inmate with the mobility and opportunity to stab his fellow inmate. Although entirely circumstantial, the proof constitutes substantial evidence in support of the determination (see, Matter of Hay v. Coombe, 229 A.D.2d 1015, 645 N.Y.S.2d 668, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 816, 651 N.Y.S.2d 406, 674 N.E.2d 336; Matter of Motell v. Napolitano, 186 A.D.2d 989, 990, 588 N.Y.S.2d 452). Petitioner's testimony that the victim was despondent and that the injury was self-inflicted presented an issue of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Hay v. Coombe, supra; Matter of Hawkins v. Coombe, 225 A.D.2d 1095, 1096, 639 N.Y.S.2d 634).
Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 30, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)