From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Hines v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 18, 2006
29 A.D.3d 1204 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

99191.

May 18, 2006.

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 a prison disciplinary rule.

Conrad Hines, Comstock, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Patrick Barnett-Mulligan of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur.


Through an investigation, correction officials discovered that petitioner was participating in gang-related activities, which included exhorting and threatening another inmate. As a result, he was charged in a misbehavior report with engaging in unauthorized organizational activities. Petitioner was found guilty of the charge following a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal with a modified penalty. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report and internal memorandum, together with the testimony of the correction sergeant who authored these documents and that of the inmate who implicated petitioner as a gang member, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Lamage v. Selsky, 304 AD2d 1004, 1005; Matter of Santiago v. Goord, 287 AD2d 841, 841). Inasmuch as the accusing inmate was not a confidential informant, the hearing officer was not required to undertake an independent in camera assessment of his credibility ( compare Matter of Thomassini v. Goord, 13 AD3d 954, appeals dismissed 5 NY3d 848). Rather, the hearing officer could evaluate the inmate's reliability based upon the testimony he gave at the hearing. Petitioner's remaining contentions are not preserved for our review given his failure to make appropriate objections at the hearing ( see Matter of Estrada v. Goord, 26 AD3d 564).

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


Summaries of

In the Matter of Hines v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 18, 2006
29 A.D.3d 1204 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

In the Matter of Hines v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CONRAD HINES, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: May 18, 2006

Citations

29 A.D.3d 1204 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3958
814 N.Y.S.2d 807

Citing Cases

Thompson v. Goord

The determination was thereafter affirmed on administrative appeal, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding by…

Ramos v. Selsky

The misbehavior report and the hearing testimony provide substantial evidence to support the determination of…