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: Gerald EDWARDS, Petitioner, v. D. VENETTOZZI, as Acting Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, et al., Respondents.
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 the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner was charged in two misbehavior reports with assaulting staff, engaging in violent conduct, refusing direct orders, creating a disturbance, interfering with staff and violating facility frisk procedures after, among other things, he punched one correction officer in the face and, a short time later, attempted to kick another correction officer. Following a combined tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of all charges and a penalty was imposed. Petitioner's administrative appeal was unsuccessful, and he thereafter commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul the determination of guilt.
We confirm. Contrary to petitioner's assertion, the detailed misbehavior reports, together with the testimony adduced at the hearing, constitute substantial evidence of his guilt (see Matter of Perez v. Dubray, 55 A.D.3d 1119, 865 N.Y.S.2d 765 [2008]; Matter of Benson v. Selsky, 50 A.D.3d 1347, 854 N.Y.S.2d 824 [2008] ). Although petitioner denied engaging in the offending conduct and contended that correction officers assaulted him without provocation, this presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Benson v. Selsky, supra; Matter of Morillo v. Goord, 38 A.D.3d 947, 947-948, 832 N.Y.S.2d 301 [2007] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his assertion that he was denied the right to call witnesses to testify on his behalf, have been examined and found to be lacking in 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: April 23, 2009
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)