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: Joaquin WINFIELD, Petitioner, v. David A. CARPENTER, as Deputy Superintendent of Programs at Great Meadow Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review two determinations which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Following a tier II disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of damaging state property. At a separate tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was also found guilty of engaging in violent conduct, committing an unhygienic act, refusing a direct order and possessing authorized property in an unauthorized area. Those determinations were administratively affirmed and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. Petitioner contends that the tier II disciplinary determination is unsupported by substantial evidence. Given the misbehavior report, together with the testimony adduced at the hearing, we find petitioner's contention to be without merit (see Matter of Lopez v. McGinnis, 21 A.D.3d 606, 798 N.Y.S.2d 923 [2005] ). As for petitioner's assertion that the tier III disciplinary hearing was untimely completed, petitioner has made no showing that he was prejudiced as a result of the one-day delay between the expiration of the first hearing extension and the request for the second hearing extension (see Matter of Edmonds v. Coombe, 239 A.D.2d 798, 798, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1023 [1997] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been examined and found to be unavailing.
ADJUDGED that the determinations are 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: May 08, 2008
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)