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: Michael SCOTT, 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 Chemung County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner, a prison inmate, challenges the determination finding him guilty of arson and the destruction of State property in violation of prison disciplinary rules. The charges stemmed from a fire that occurred in petitioner's prison cell. A correction officer extinguished the fire and noted that a mattress, sheet, pillow case and two blankets were completely destroyed. It was noted in the investigation report that petitioner was alone in the block at the time of the fire and that no other inmates were in the facility. In our view, the misbehavior report and the investigation reports, combined with the inferences that can be drawn therefrom, constitute substantial evidence supporting the charges of arson and destruction of State property (see, Matter of Rose v. Goord, 259 A.D.2d 818, 686 N.Y.S.2d 518; Matter of Phillips v. Goord, 252 A.D.2d 642, 675 N.Y.S.2d 200).
Moreover, nothing in the record supports petitioner's assertion that the Hearing Officer was biased and not impartial (see, Matter of Monge v. Goord, 251 A.D.2d 804, 674 N.Y.S.2d 792; Matter of Applegate v. Coombe, 237 A.D.2d 836, 656 N.Y.S.2d 949, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 803, 661 N.Y.S.2d 179, 683 N.E.2d 1053). Furthermore, we reject petitioner's contention that intermittent gaps in the hearing transcript warrant reversal. “[T]he missing testimony ‘is neither material to the determination nor of such significance as to preclude meaningful review’ ” (Matter of Torres v. Coombe, 234 A.D.2d 710, 710-711, 651 N.Y.S.2d 642, quoting Matter of Rodriguez v. Coughlin, 167 A.D.2d 671, 671, 563 N.Y.S.2d 248). We have examined petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
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: January 06, 2000
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)