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.
IN RE: BASHAN RUDOLPH, PETITIONER, v. ANTHONY ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
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 [Michael M. Mohun, A.J.], entered May 15, 2017) to annul a determination of respondent. The determination found after a tier III hearing that petitioner had violated various inmate rules.
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.
Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination, following a tier III disciplinary hearing, that he violated inmate rules 106.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2[B][7][i] [refusal to obey direct order] ) and 113.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2[B][14][i] [weapon possession] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the determination is supported by substantial evidence, including the misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who wrote it (see Matter of Medina v. Fischer, 137 AD3d 1584, 1585 [4th Dept 2016]; Matter of Spears v. Fischer, 103 AD3d 1135, 1135–1136 [4th Dept 2013]; see generally People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130, 139–140 [1985] ), notwithstanding that the videotape of the incident is inconclusive in certain respects (see generally Matter of Hutchinson v Annucci, 149 AD3d 1443, 1443 [3d Dept 2017] ). The testimony of petitioner and the other inmates who testified at the hearing merely raised credibility issues that the Hearing Officer was entitled to resolve against petitioner (see Matter of Foster v. Coughlin, 76 N.Y.2d 964, 966 [1990]; Matter of Heath v. Walker, 255 A.D.2d 1006, 1006 [4th Dept 1998] ), as did the alleged inconsistencies in the testimony of the correction officer who witnessed the incident (see Matter of Headley v. Annucci, 150 AD3d 1513, 1514 [3d Dept 2017]; see also Matter of Griffin v. Goord, 266 A.D.2d 830, 830 [4th Dept 1999] ).
Mark W. Bennett
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: TP 17–00887
Decided: December 22, 2017
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)