From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Flemming

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 24, 2010
74 A.D.3d 1693 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 508613.

June 24, 2010.

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.

Robert Flemming, Dannemora, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Spain, Lahtinen, Stein and Garry, JJ.


Petitioner, a prison inmate, was using the telephone when a correction officer gave him a direct order to sign the telephone sheet. Petitioner refused in a profane manner after which a sergeant was notified. The sergeant arrived and directed petitioner to get off the telephone and, after refusing, petitioner swung a closed fist at the sergeant. In the ensuing struggle, three correction officers were injured. Based upon this incident, petitioner was served with a misbehavior report charging him with assault, refusing a direct order, using the telephone without authorization and violating telephone guidelines. Petitioner was found guilty after a tier III disciplinary hearing and, after the determination was affirmed administratively, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. The detailed misbehavior report, along with the hearing testimony, including petitioner's admissions, and the voluminous documentary evidence provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Perez v Fischer, 69 AD3d 1279, 1279; Matter of Jones v Fischer, 69 AD3d 1065, 1065-1066). To the extent that petitioner asserted that he had no reason to assault the officers, that raised an issue of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see Matter of Edwards v Leclaire, 71 AD3d 1199; Matter of Hayes v Fischer, 70 AD3d 1085, 1086). Petitioner's claim that he was improperly denied the right to view photographs of the officers' injuries is unpreserved for our review based upon his failure to raise that objection during the hearing ( see Matter of Terrence v Fischer, 64 AD3d 1110, 1111; Matter of Griffin v Selsky, 60 AD3d 1247, 1248).

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

In re Flemming

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 24, 2010
74 A.D.3d 1693 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

In re Flemming

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ROBERT FLEMMING, Petitioner, v. BRIAN FISCHER, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jun 24, 2010

Citations

74 A.D.3d 1693 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 5650
906 N.Y.S.2d 114

Citing Cases

In re Daryl Jackson

Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging that determination. To the extent that…

White v. LaClair

Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of the charges and the determination was…