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: Steven S. ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. Donald SELSKY, as 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 Ulster County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner sent a letter to the deputy superintendent of programs at the correctional facility where he was incarcerated complaining about a correction counselor and comparing him to a former supervisor whom he had murdered. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with making threats and was found guilty of the charge following a tier III disciplinary hearing. After the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.
We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the letter and petitioner's admission that he authored the letter, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Alston v. Goord, 25 A.D.3d 852, 852, 807 N.Y.S.2d 202 [2006]; Matter of Jones v. Department of Correctional Servs., 283 A.D.2d 805, 805, 724 N.Y.S.2d 793 [2001] ). Petitioner's assertion that the letter was misinterpreted presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Alston v. Goord, supra at 852, 807 N.Y.S.2d 202; Matter of McFadden v. Armmitage, 1 A.D.3d 670, 670-671, 766 N.Y.S.2d 617 [2003] ). His claim of Hearing Officer bias has not been preserved for our review.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: August 02, 2007
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)