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: Chester ALMONOR, Petitioner, v. Donald SELSKY, as Director of Special Housing Inmate Disciplinary Program, Respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
We are unpersuaded by petitioner's challenge to the determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules prohibiting assault on an inmate, assault on staff (two charges), fighting and possession of a weapon arising out of an incident in which petitioner slashed another prison inmate with a razor and also cut Correction Officer S. Robisch during the course of his effort to subdue petitioner. First, we conclude that the Hearing Officer did not err in taking Robisch's testimony via speaker phone due to the fact that Robisch was covering the facility housing unit at the time of the hearing and there was no one available to relieve him (see, Matter of Greany v. Irvin, 221 A.D.2d 1027, 634 N.Y.S.2d 287, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 803, 645 N.Y.S.2d 446, 668 N.E.2d 417). Notably, petitioner was present at the time of the questioning and, in fact, presented three pages of questions which the Hearing Officer put to Robisch on petitioner's behalf.
Second, notwithstanding Robisch's candid acknowledgment that his injury possibly could have been sustained accidentally, record evidence that petitioner resisted Robisch's effort to subdue him and that Robisch's elbow was cut by the razor blade in the process provides sufficient factual support for the finding that petitioner was guilty of assault on staff (cf., Matter of Lashway v. Coughlin, 220 A.D.2d 912, 632 N.Y.S.2d 325). Petitioner's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for our review or have been found to be lacking in 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: September 10, 1998
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)