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: William HOSKINS, Petitioner, v. Brian FISCHER, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, 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 respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Having attempted to pass a cigarette pack containing seven Biaxin pills into another inmate's prison cell, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with possession/exchange of unauthorized medication and unauthorized exchange of personal property. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of both charges. That determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding followed.
We confirm. The misbehavior report, the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who authored it, and the hearing testimony from a nurse confirming that petitioner did not have a prescription for the medication in question comprise substantial evidence in support of the determination of guilt (see Matter of McKinley v. Goord, 40 A.D.3d 1280, 1280, 836 N.Y.S.2d 349 [2007], lv. denied 9 N.Y.3d 807, 843 N.Y.S.2d 536, 875 N.E.2d 29 [2007]; Matter of Matthews v. Goord, 275 A.D.2d 841, 841, 713 N.Y.S.2d 510 [2000] ). Conflicting testimony offered by petitioner created a credibility issue for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Morillo v. Goord, 38 A.D.3d 947, 947-948, 832 N.Y.S.2d 301 [2007] ).
We reject petitioner's claim that he was denied the right to attend part of the hearing. The record contains substantial evidence supporting the Hearing Officer's determination that petitioner refused to attend, thereby waiving his right to be present (see Matter of Davis v. Goord, 20 A.D.3d 706, 707-708, 800 N.Y.S.2d 634 [2005], lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 715, 807 N.Y.S.2d 16, 840 N.E.2d 1030 [2005] ).
Petitioner's remaining contentions have been examined and are unavailing.
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 13, 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)