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: Jose MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, 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, an inmate, was charged in a misbehavior report with violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting illicit drug use. Following the ensuing tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty as charged and ultimately given a penalty of two months and 24 days in the special housing unit, five months and 24 days loss of privileges and six months recommended loss of good time. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. Initially, we note that the determination of guilt is supported by the requisite substantial evidence in the form of the misbehavior report, together with the positive urinalysis test results and related documentation (see Matter of Daniels v. Goord, 38 A.D.3d 1073, 1073, 832 N.Y.S.2d 318 [2007] ). Turning to petitioner's claim that the Hearing Officer was biased, there is no indication in the record that the determination flowed from any purported bias (see Matter of Reid v. Goord, 34 A.D.3d 954, 955, 823 N.Y.S.2d 316 [2006] ). As for petitioner's challenge to the severity of the penalty imposed, we cannot conclude upon review of the record that it was so shocking to one's sense of fairness as to be excessive (see Matter of Long v. Goord, 32 A.D.3d 1121, 1122, 821 N.Y.S.2d 488 [2006] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions are not properly before us.
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: February 07, 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)