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: George ADORNO, Petitioner, v. Glenn GOORD, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.
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 which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Following an incident in which an inmate reported that he had been assaulted by petitioner, who was using a paint scraping tool to remove floor covering at the time, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with assault and possessing a weapon. He was found guilty of the former charge but not the latter 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 testimony of its author, the confidential testimony considered by the Hearing Officer in camera and the documentary proof, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Turner v. Goord, 32 A.D.3d 1119, 1120, 821 N.Y.S.2d 309 [2006]; Matter of Key v. Goord, 19 A.D.3d 849, 797 N.Y.S.2d 168 [2005] ). Notably, the Hearing Officer independently assessed the reliability of the confidential informant by conducting a personal interview (see Matter of Calhoun v. Goord, 20 A.D.3d 628, 629, 798 N.Y.S.2d 212 [2005]; Matter of Camacho v. Goord, 18 A.D.3d 1046, 1046-1047, 795 N.Y.S.2d 773 [2005] ). Although petitioner denied striking the inmate with the scraper, this presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Wilson v. Goord, 23 A.D.3d 727, 803 N.Y.S.2d 311 [2005] ). Petitioner's remaining claims have 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: December 07, 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)