From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Amaker v. Senkowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 21, 2000
278 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

December 21, 2000.

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.

Anthony D. Amaker, Dannemora, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Nancy A. Spiegel of counsel), Albany, for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain and Mugglin, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules which prohibit inmates from refusing a direct order, making threats, verbal harassment and creating a disturbance. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the correction officers who witnessed the incident, provide substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Johnson v. Selsky, 271 A.D.2d 770). Moreover, we are unpersuaded by petitioner's contention that the Hearing Officer was biased and, in any event, petitioner failed to establish that the outcome of the hearing flowed from the alleged bias (see, Matter of Madison v. Goord, 273 A.D.2d 557; Matter of Lawrence v. Headley, 257 A.D.2d 837).

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


Summaries of

In the Matter of Amaker v. Senkowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 21, 2000
278 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

In the Matter of Amaker v. Senkowski

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ANTHONY D. AMAKER, Petitioner, v. DANIEL A. SENKOWSKI, as…

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

Date published: Dec 21, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
718 N.Y.S.2d 237

Citing Cases

Matter of Green v. McGinnis

We also reject petitioner's contention that he was denied the right to call a particular witness since this…

In the Matter of Crews v. O'Keefe

Following a tier III hearing, petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules…