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: Anthony TAMILIO, Petitioner, v. Philip COOMBE, Jr., as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
After participating in the family reunion program at Great Meadow Correctional Facility in Washington County, petitioner, an inmate at the facility, was charged with using a controlled substance. The misbehavior report stems from the positive results of two urinalysis tests that indicated the presence of opiates. Petitioner contends that the Hearing Officer erred in refusing to allow petitioner to call his wife as a witness. Where the record reveals a valid reason for a denial of an inmate's request to call a witness (i.e., the testimony would be irrelevant or cumulative to that of other witnesses), such determination should not be annulled (see, Matter of Roper v. McCoy, 227 A.D.2d 786, 787, 642 N.Y.S.2d 381, 382). Here, the Hearing Officer acknowledged and stipulated that petitioner's wife would testify that she did not provide petitioner with any drugs. The Hearing Officer further acknowledged, and petitioner agreed, that the package room would not have permitted petitioner's wife to bring any foods into the facility that contained poppy seeds, which may have caused petitioner's positive test results (cf., Matter of Fleming v. Coughlin, 222 A.D.2d 835, 836, 634 N.Y.S.2d 890). Given these acknowledgments, we find that the Hearing Officer was justified in concluding that petitioner's wife would not have offered any material information (see generally, Matter of McCorkle v. Coughlin, 194 A.D.2d 1034, 1035, 599 N.Y.S.2d 664). Petitioner's assertion that other types of foods may have contributed to the positive test results is speculative. In any event, our review of the record discloses that petitioner received a fair and impartial hearing and that respondents' determination is supported by substantial evidence.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: April 03, 1997
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)