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: Robert REED, Appellant, v. Donald SELSKY, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered July 21, 2003 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner was charged with, and found guilty of, violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits the possession of a weapon after a search of his cell uncovered a plastic knife which was sharpened toward the point. Following an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding. Supreme Court rejected petitioner's procedural claims and dismissed the petition. This appeal ensued.
Initially, we are unpersuaded by petitioner's assertion that he was improperly denied a photocopy of the log book entry. The employee assistant quoted the relevant log book information on the assistant form and it was given to petitioner. Although he was not given an actual photocopy of the log book, petitioner has established no prejudice in preparing a defense (see Matter of Branch v. Selsky, 298 A.D.2d 744, 748 N.Y.S.2d 523 [2002] ).
Similarly, petitioner's contention that he was not timely served with the hearing disposition in accordance with 7 NYCRR 254.7(a)(5) is belied by the record. Notwithstanding any discrepancies as to the time that petitioner received the disposition form, an affidavit from the Hearing Officer establishes that he personally served petitioner with the disposition shortly after the conclusion of the hearing, and petitioner's signature on the disposition sheet indicates that he received a copy thereof. Petitioner's remaining contentions, including that Supreme Court improperly considered an affidavit submitted by the Hearing Officer, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
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: July 15, 2004
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)