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: William VICTOR, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner, a prison inmate, was charged with and found guilty of possessing a weapon in violation of prison disciplinary rules after a razor blade was found secreted in his mouth. Petitioner challenges the determination of his guilt and we confirm. To the extent that petitioner raised an issue of substantial evidence, we conclude that the detailed misbehavior report, together with the corroborating unusual incident report, memoranda and testimony presented at the hearing, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see, Matter of Foster v. Coughlin, 76 N.Y.2d 964, 563 N.Y.S.2d 728, 565 N.E.2d 477). We reject petitioner's contention that the Hearing Officer's failure to inquire as to why the witnesses requested would not testify denied petitioner the right to call witnesses. The record establishes that petitioner waived any objection in this regard by acquiescing to the witnesses' refusal to testify without requesting further inquiry and indicating his willingness to proceed with the hearing (see, Matter of McClean v. Le Fevre, 142 A.D.2d 911, 912, 531 N.Y.S.2d 411). We find petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim of Hearing Officer bias and assertion that the hearing transcript is incomplete, to be either without merit or unpreserved for our review.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: September 17, 1998
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)