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: Damon WHEELER, petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER, etc., et al., respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, dated September 16, 2003, which confirmed a determination of a Hearing Officer dated July 31, 2003, made after a Tier III disciplinary hearing, finding the petitioner guilty of violating two prison disciplinary rules, and imposing a penalty.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.
In reviewing a prison disciplinary determination made as a result of a hearing at which evidence was taken pursuant to direction by law, the only question that may be raised in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 transferred to this court is whether the determination was supported by substantial evidence (see CPLR 7803[4]; People ex rel. Vega v. Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130, 139, 495 N.Y.S.2d 332, 485 N.E.2d 997; Matter of Ramsey v. Phillips, 11 A.D.3d 470, 782 N.Y.S.2d 373). Contrary to the petitioner's contentions, the hearing testimony, the inmate misbehavior report, and his own admission that he refused to leave his cell when ordered to do so, constitute substantial evidence that he was guilty of the charges against him (see Matter of Gilzene v. McGinnis, 300 A.D.2d 658, 659, 751 N.Y.S.2d 785; Matter of Ramos v. Goord, 286 A.D.2d 392, 728 N.Y.S.2d 713; Matter of Riley v. Goord, 278 A.D.2d 327, 328, 717 N.Y.S.2d 349).
Furthermore, contrary to the petitioner's contention, the Hearing Officer was not directly involved in the underlying incident and his involvement in the investigation of it was, at most, tangential (see 7 NYCRR 254.1; Matter of Vidal v. Goord, 273 A.D.2d 535, 709 N.Y.S.2d 240; Matter of Reynolds v. Selsky, 270 A.D.2d 743, 744, 704 N.Y.S.2d 389; Matter of Kennedy v. Coughlin, 172 A.D.2d 666, 667, 568 N.Y.S.2d 461).
The petitioner's remaining contentions cannot be raised in this proceeding to review the determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services.
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 04, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)