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: Shawn WOODWARD, Appellant, v. Donald SELSKY, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Bradley, J.), entered May 10, 2006 in Albany County, as amended by a judgment entered August 9, 2006 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of possession of a weapon. That determination was affirmed on administrative review, prompting petitioner to commence this CPLR article 78 proceeding which, in turn, was dismissed by Supreme Court. Petitioner now appeals.
To the extent that petitioner is contending that the underlying determination is not supported by substantial evidence, such claim has not been preserved for our review inasmuch as it is being raised for the first time on appeal (see Matter of Harrison v. Selsky, 2 A.D.3d 1232, 768 N.Y.S.2d 856 [2003] ). In any event, the misbehavior report, related documentation, photographs and hearing testimony comprise the requisite substantial evidence (see Matter of Powell v. Goord, 34 A.D.3d 876, 877, 823 N.Y.S.2d 579 [2006] ).
Petitioner's claim that he received inadequate employee assistance also is unavailing. The record reveals that through the efforts of both the assistant and the Hearing Officer, petitioner ultimately was provided with all of the documents that he requested (see Matter of Trang v. Goord, 283 A.D.2d 816, 817, 728 N.Y.S.2d 202 [2001] ). Moreover, petitioner failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by the alleged inadequacies (see Matter of Bernier v. Goord, 3 A.D.3d 803, 770 N.Y.S.2d 903 [2004] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions, to the extent they are properly before us, have been examined and found to be without merit.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
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 13, 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)