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: Michael HORTON, Petitioner, v. Michael J. ALLARD, as Superintendent of Franklin Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Franklin County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with conspiring to introduce narcotics and soliciting others to smuggle items into the correctional facility. The misbehavior report relates that petitioner's girlfriend was arrested when attempting to visit petitioner while in possession of marihuana. The girlfriend admitted that on several occasions petitioner had solicited her to smuggle marihuana, obtained from petitioner's sister, into the correctional facility during visits. Following a disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of both charges and, other than a modification of the penalty imposed, the determination was upheld on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
The misbehavior report, supporting documentation, testimony at the hearing and the confidential information provided by the correction officer investigating the incident provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Riley v. Goord, 22 A.D.3d 925, 802 N.Y.S.2d 524 [2005]; Matter of Lopez v. Goord, 20 A.D.3d 836, 798 N.Y.S.2d 700 [2005]; Matter of Simpson v. Goord, 308 A.D.2d 641, 642, 764 N.Y.S.2d 368 [2003], lv. denied 2 N.Y.3d 704, 778 N.Y.S.2d 774, 811 N.E.2d 36 [2004] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the record establishes that the Hearing Officer, having personally interviewed the investigating officer, assessed the reliability and credibility of the information provided (see Matter of Calhoun v. Goord, 20 A.D.3d 628, 629, 798 N.Y.S.2d 212 [2005]; Matter of Johnson v. Goord, 7 A.D.3d 863, 864, 776 N.Y.S.2d 914 [2004] ). To the extent that petitioner challenges the foundation for the reliance on the positive drug test results, the issue is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as petitioner raises the issue for the first time in this proceeding (see Matter of Beckles v. Selsky, 273 A.D.2d 584, 585, 710 N.Y.S.2d 552 [2000], lv. denied 95 N.Y.2d 764, 716 N.Y.S.2d 38, 739 N.E.2d 294 [2000] ).
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: January 26, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third 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)