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: Jamal BRAGG, Petitioner, v. Donald SELSKY, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, 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 a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits disobeying a direct order. The record establishes that as part of petitioner's duties as an audiovisual technician, he was to play the scheduled movie left in the audiovisual box. When a problem arose with the movie that had been left in the audiovisual box, petitioner initially was ordered to play another specified movie. While there is no dispute that petitioner could not comply with this order because the specified movie was unavailable, the correction officer who authored the misbehavior report testified that petitioner failed to comply with a subsequent order to pick one of six other movies which were available to play. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report and testimony at the hearing provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Allende v. Selsky, 302 A.D.2d 764, 765, 754 N.Y.S.2d 916 [2003]; Matter of Batten v. Goord, 258 A.D.2d 794, 684 N.Y.S.2d 445 [1999] ). Accordingly, the determination will not be disturbed.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
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: March 17, 2005
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)