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: Phillip JEAN-LAURENT, Petitioner, v. Joseph DAVID, as Superintendent of Greene Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Greene County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services and a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner, an inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging two prison disciplinary determinations stemming from two unrelated incidents. The first determination, rendered on April 6, 2006 after a tier III disciplinary hearing, found petitioner guilty of harassment, creating a disturbance, refusing a direct order and making threats. The second determination, rendered on May 11, 2006 after a tier II disciplinary hearing, found petitioner guilty of a visibility obstruction.
We now confirm. Contrary to petitioner's assertion, the misbehavior report and corroborating hearing testimony from the authoring correction officer in the April 2006 hearing (see Matter of McCloud v. Selsky, 45 A.D.3d 1127, 1128, 844 N.Y.S.2d 917 [2007] ) and the misbehavior report and hearing testimony from petitioner's cellmate in the May 2006 hearing (see Matter of Martin v. Goord, 37 A.D.3d 961, 962, 829 N.Y.S.2d 746 [2007] ) comprise substantial evidence to support the determinations of guilt. Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claims that he was denied the right to present witness testimony and the Hearing Officer was biased, have been examined and found to be unavailing.
ADJUDGED that the determinations are 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: May 15, 2008
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)