HENDRIX v. WILLIAMS (1998)

 The determination that petitioner violated inmate rule 180.11 (7 NYCRR 270.2[B][26][ii] ) is not supported by substantial evidence.   Petitioner's receipt of correspondence from another inmate's aunt does not violate any of the policies and procedures governing the inmate correspondence program (see, 7 NYCRR part 720;  cf., Matter of Montgomery v. Jones, 88 A.D.2d 1003, 451 N.Y.S.2d 897).   Substantial evidence is also lacking to support the determination that petitioner violated inmate rule 180.17 (7 NYCRR 270.2[B][26][vii] ).   Petitioner's possession of legal documents belonging to another inmate, without more, does not establish that petitioner provided unauthorized legal assistance to another inmate (cf., Matter of Tate v. Senkowski, 215 A.D.2d 903, 904, 627 N.Y.S.2d 100, lv. denied 86 N.Y.2d 708, 634 N.Y.S.2d 441, 658 N.E.2d 219;  Matter of Rivera v. Coughlin, 210 A.D.2d 543, 544, 620 N.Y.S.2d 505).   We therefore grant the petition, annul the determination and direct that all references thereto be expunged from petitioner's institutional record.

Determination unanimously annulled on the law without costs and petition granted.

MEMORANDUM: