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: Pablo COSTELLO, Petitioner, v. Joseph SMITH, as Superintendent of Shawangunk Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.
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.
After petitioner was observed by a female correction officer sitting in a telephone booth across from her desk not talking on the telephone, but staring at her with his hand inside his pants, he was found guilty following a tier III disciplinary hearing of the charge of harassment. The determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, but the penalty was modified. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
The detailed misbehavior report, which related that petitioner stared at a female correction officer while making crude gestures, constitutes substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Applewhite v. Goord, 22 A.D.3d 985, 986, 802 N.Y.S.2d 389 [2005]; Matter of Russell v. Selsky, 22 A.D.3d 998, 999, 802 N.Y.S.2d 800 [2005] ). Contrary to petitioner's claim, the transcript of the hearing does not disclose that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from any such bias (see Matter of Dagnone v. Goord, 297 A.D.2d 869, 746 N.Y.S.2d 874 [2002], lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 503, 753 N.Y.S.2d 806, 783 N.E.2d 896 [2002] ). Likewise, there is no indication that the transcript of the hearing was deliberately altered or that significant portions are missing such as to preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Carbuccia v. Goord, 298 A.D.2d 801, 802, 748 N.Y.S.2d 709 [2002] ).
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: February 02, 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)