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: Elvin LEBRON, Petitioner, v. Dale ARTUS, as Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review two determinations of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
As a result of petitioner's refusal to exit his cell during a mandatory call out, he was charged in a misbehavior report with a facility movement violation. Petitioner was found guilty of the charge following a tier II disciplinary hearing, and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. Thereafter, petitioner was charged in a second misbehavior report with refusing a direct order and being out of place when he failed to promptly respond to another call out. Following another tier II disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of being out of place and this determination was also affirmed on administrative appeal. Petitioner subsequently commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging both determinations.
We confirm. The first misbehavior report provides substantial evidence supporting the determination finding petitioner guilty of violating facility movement regulations (see Matter of Davila v. Selsky, 29 A.D.3d 1247, 1248, 814 N.Y.S.2d 830 [2006] ). Likewise, the second misbehavior report, along with petitioner's admission that he was late for the call out, provides substantial evidence supporting the determination finding him guilty of being out of place (see Matter of Lamage v. Selsky, 26 A.D.3d 699, 700, 810 N.Y.S.2d 534 [2006]; Matter of Scott v. New York State Dept. of Corrections, 18 A.D.3d 925, 793 N.Y.S.2d 921 [2005] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions either have not been preserved for our review or are lacking in merit.
ADJUDGED that the determinations are 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: December 28, 2006
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)