From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chandler v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Oct 2, 2014
121 A.D.3d 1142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-10-2

In the Matter of Paul CHANDLER, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

Paul Chandler, Comstock, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.


Paul Chandler, Comstock, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

During a search of his cell, petitioner was found to be in possession of numerous Uniform Commercial Code (hereinafter UCC) forms and related literature. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules prohibiting possession of unauthorized literature and UCC materials, as well as contraband. After that determination was upheld on administrative appeal, petitioner commenced the present CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. Petitioner's contention that he was authorized to possess the UCC forms and related documentation is belied by the misbehavior report, documentary evidence and hearing testimony, all of which provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Bunting v. Fischer, 94 A.D.3d 1320, 1320, 944 N.Y.S.2d 321 [2012]; Matter of Samuels v. Department of Correctional Servs. Staff, 84 A.D.3d 1629, 1630, 923 N.Y.S.2d 309 [2011] ). Further, as the possession of these materials is prohibited, the manner in which he obtained them is immaterial ( see Matter of Arrington v. Venettozzi, 87 A.D.3d 1215, 1215–1216, 929 N.Y.S.2d 784 [2011] ). His unpreserved argument that the rules prohibiting him from possessing the documents in question are unconstitutional “must be raised in the context of the prison grievance procedure” ( Matter of Bunting v. Fischer, 94 A.D.3d at 1321, 944 N.Y.S.2d 321). Petitioner's remaining claims are also unpreserved for our review and, in any event, are without merit.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed. PETERS, P.J., GARRY, EGAN JR., DEVINE and CLARK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Chandler v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Oct 2, 2014
121 A.D.3d 1142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Chandler v. Annucci

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Paul CHANDLER, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 2, 2014

Citations

121 A.D.3d 1142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
121 A.D.3d 1142
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 6628

Citing Cases

Malave v. Bedard

We confirm. The misbehavior report, the seized documents, petitioner's admission that he possessed the…

Malave v. Bedard

The misbehavior report, the seized documents, petitioner's admission that he possessed the documents and the…