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: Ronnie COVINGTON, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of the New York State 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 Washington 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, was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits possession of a weapon. Evidence presented at petitioner's tier III disciplinary hearing included the misbehavior report, authored by a civilian electrician who had been repairing the light fixture in petitioner's cell when he found a concealed nine-inch-long sharpened metal rod in the fixture housing. The misbehavior report was consistent with the electrician's hearing testimony, wherein he stated that the metal rod was in his exclusive possession from the time he discovered it until he turned it over to the State Police. We find this sufficient to constitute substantial evidence in support of the determination of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Vega v. Coughlin, 195 A.D.2d 1076, 600 N.Y.S.2d 540).
Petitioner's claims that procedural errors denied him the right to a fair hearing are without foundation. While certain of petitioner's requests for witnesses were denied by the Hearing Officer, this was for the stated reason that their testimony would be irrelevant or redundant (see, Matter of Cowart v. Pico, 213 A.D.2d 853, 855, 623 N.Y.S.2d 948, lv. denied 85 N.Y.2d 812, 631 N.Y.S.2d 288, 655 N.E.2d 401). That petitioner did not receive written refusal forms regarding these witnesses is harmless error, given his failure to demonstrate that his case suffered any prejudice from the lack thereof (see, Matter of Morrison v. Selsky, 246 A.D.2d 939, 667 N.Y.S.2d 856).
Petitioner's allegations of Hearing Officer bias are also rejected. While it is evident that the Hearing Officer credited the testimony presented against petitioner over that presented on his behalf, the resolution of issues of credibility lay within his authority (see, Matter of Patterson v. Senkowski, 204 A.D.2d 831, 832-833, 612 N.Y.S.2d 84). As the resulting decision was based on substantial evidence, it will not be disturbed. Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
GRAFFEO, J.
CARDONA, P.J., MERCURE, CREW III and YESAWICH JR., JJ., concur.
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: June 17, 1999
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)