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: Aumont EDWARDS, Appellant, v. John KEANE, et al., Respondents.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Phillip Coombe, Jr., dated February 1, 1995, finding the petitioner guilty of assault on an inmate and imposing a penalty, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), dated July 24, 1995, which dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the respondents did not violate their own rules by failing to commence a disciplinary hearing within seven days after his confinement to a Special Housing Unit. A superintendent's hearing must be commenced no more than seven days after an inmate's confinement, and completed “within 14 days following the writing of the misbehavior report”, unless otherwise authorized by the commissioner or his designee (see, 7 NYCRR 251-5.1). Here, the respondents complied with the rule by commencing a hearing on the seventh day of the petitioner's confinement. Although the matter was subsequently reassigned to a second hearing officer who recommenced the hearing, the commissioner's designee authorized this procedure because the first hearing officer was not available to complete the hearing in a timely fashion. As directed by the commissioner's designee, the second hearing officer completed the hearing within 14 days following the writing of the misbehavior report. Under these circumstances, there is no merit to the petitioner's claim that he was denied a timely hearing (cf., Matter of Anderson v. Coughlin, 195 A.D.2d 1075, 600 N.Y.S.2d 539).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY 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.
Decided: February 03, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)