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: Donald KUBIK, Appellant, v. Donald SELSKY, etc., et al., Respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services dated September 17, 1996, which affirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer dated June 25, 1996, after a Tier III Superintendent's hearing, finding the petitioner guilty of violating an institutional rule and imposing a penalty.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner, an inmate at the Green Haven Correctional Facility, was charged in a misbehavior report with violating a prison rule which prohibits the possession of contraband that may be classified as a weapon. The petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charge at his Tier III hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Officer found the petitioner guilty of the charge and imposed a penalty. After an unsuccessful administrative appeal, the petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging the determination.
The petitioner's claim that he was denied adequate assistance by the inmate assistant he selected because the assistant did not provide him with the results of an interview with a particular corrections officer is without merit. The petitioner was fully able to examine the corrections officer at the hearing and to present his defense to the Hearing Officer (see, Matter of Wright v. Scully, 124 A.D.2d 805, 508 N.Y.S.2d 528; Matter of Serrano v. Coughlin, 152 A.D.2d 790, 543 N.Y.S.2d 571).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: December 01, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)