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 CHAVIS, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. 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 the Superintendent of Southport Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
At the conclusion of a tier II disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of making threats. That determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, prompting petitioner to commence this CPLR article 78 proceeding.
We confirm. The determination of guilt is supported by substantial evidence in the form of the misbehavior report, related documentation and hearing testimony (see Matter of Johnson v. Goord, 40 A.D.3d 1335, 1336, 836 N.Y.S.2d 737 [2007] ). Furthermore, petitioner's persistent interruptions and uncooperative behavior during the hearing, despite warnings to cease such conduct, served as a sufficient basis for his removal from the hearing (see 7 NYCRR 254.6[a][2]; Matter of Raqiyb v. Goord, 24 A.D.3d 1013, 1013, 806 N.Y.S.2d 747 [2005] ). Petitioner's claim of hearing officer bias is unsubstantiated in the record and, in any event, there is no indication that the determination flowed from any alleged bias (see Matter of Davis v. Smith, 32 A.D.3d 1096, 1097, 820 N.Y.S.2d 866 [2006] ). We have examined petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
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: September 20, 2007
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)