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: Leval LYDE, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, 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 respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits inmates from conspiring to introduce drugs into the correctional facility. The charges stemmed from confidential information and an ensuing cell search which uncovered two lists containing several inmate names along with dollar amounts which the inmates apparently owed to petitioner. Records from the facility business office revealed that the dollar amounts corresponded with disbursements sent by the listed inmates to an individual whose address was also discovered in petitioner's possession. Following an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking annulment of the determination.
We confirm. The Hearing Officer heard testimony from confidential sources who provided information leading to the search of petitioner's cell, and the confidential information, misbehavior report and testimony presented at the hearing provided substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt, notwithstanding the fact that no drugs were discovered in petitioner's possession during the search of his cell (see, Matter of Olave v. Goord, 251 A.D.2d 794, 674 N.Y.S.2d 462). Finally, petitioner's claim that he compiled the lists for the purpose of arranging flower deliveries for the named inmates merely created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Pacheco v. Dufrain, 251 A.D.2d 817, 675 N.Y.S.2d 907).
Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claims of Hearing Officer bias and ineffective employee assistance, have been reviewed and found to be unpersuasive.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
MERCURE, J.
MIKOLL, J.P., YESAWICH JR., PETERS and MUGGLIN, JJ., concur.
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: November 04, 1999
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)