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: Rafael RIVERA, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Chemung County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner, an inmate, attempted to remove various food items from the feed up area when he was stopped by a correction officer who confiscated most of the items. In response, petitioner became loud and disruptive, ignored the correction officer's directives to cease such conduct, threw one of the food items against a wall and ran into the mess hall. As a result, he was charged in a misbehavior report with engaging in violent conduct, interfering with an employee, leaving an assigned area, smuggling, stealing state property and refusing a direct order. He was found guilty of all charges following a tier III disciplinary hearing. The determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of its author and another correction officer present in the mess hall, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of May v. Selsky, 291 A.D.2d 591, 592, 736 N.Y.S.2d 918 [2002]; Matter of Dawes v. Selsky, 280 A.D.2d 816, 816, 721 N.Y.S.2d 140 [2001], lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 712, 729 N.Y.S.2d 440, 754 N.E.2d 200 [2001] ). Moreover, petitioner was not improperly denied the right to call witnesses as he failed to sufficiently identify the civilian he wished to have testify (see Matter of Sims v. Goord, 274 A.D.2d 701, 701, 711 N.Y.S.2d 545 [2000] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions, to the extent they are preserved for our review, are 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: March 10, 2005
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)