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: Donald M. BENNETT, Petitioner, v. Michael J. BINTZ, as Superintendent of Riverview Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules prohibiting interference with a facility employee and harassment. In the misbehavior report, the reporting correction officer alleged that he had observed petitioner standing at the medication window in the facility's infirmary carrying on a lengthy discussion with the nurse who was on duty. As evidenced by a log entry, entered a week earlier, the officer had previously admonished petitioner to desist from bothering this nurse. Substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt was presented in the form of the misbehavior report, the log entry, a memorandum authored by the nurse who averred that petitioner had made inappropriately personal comments to her on several occasions and that she had twice asked him to stop, and petitioner's own testimony wherein he conceded that he had given the nurse personal compliments on previous occasions (see, Matter of Hamlett v. Strack, 273 A.D.2d 587, 710 N.Y.S.2d 553; Matter of Kalwasinski v. Senkowski, 244 A.D.2d 738, 739, 664 N.Y.S.2d 841). Petitioner's assertion that the misbehavior report was filed against him in retaliation for grievances that he had filed against another nurse arising out of unrelated incidents is not supported by the record and, in any event, raised issues of credibility for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see, Matter of Flowers v. Barkley, 244 A.D.2d 682, 683, 664 N.Y.S.2d 373). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his allegation of Hearing Officer bias, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
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 17, 2002
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)