From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Robert Taylor v. Fischer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Sep 29, 2011
87 A.D.3d 1256 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

2011-09-29

In the Matter of Robert TAYLOR, Petitioner,v.Brian FISCHER, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.


Robert Taylor, Sonyea, petitioner pro se.Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Laura Etlinger of counsel), for respondent.

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.

Petitioner was requested to provide a urine specimen for urinalysis testing, but claimed to be unable to do so even though he was offered a cup of water each hour for three consecutive hours, which he declined. As a result, he was charged in a misbehavior report with refusing a direct order and failing to comply with urinalysis testing procedures. He was found guilty of the charges at the conclusion of a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The detailed misbehavior report, together with the testimony adduced at the hearing, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Duffy v. Fischer, 78 A.D.3d 1384, 1385, 910 N.Y.S.2d 698 [2010]; Matter of Moreno v. Goord, 30 A.D.3d 708, 709, 817 N.Y.S.2d 173 [2006] ). While petitioner stated that he was unable to urinate due to a medical condition for which he had yet been evaluated, petitioner, in fact, admitted that he had provided urine specimens in the recent past, thereby presenting a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see Matter of Sterling v. Fischer, 75 A.D.3d 709, 903 N.Y.S.2d 281 [2010]; Matter of Credle v. Selsky, 46 A.D.3d 989, 990, 846 N.Y.S.2d 797 [2007] ). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be unpersuasive. Therefore, we find no reason to disturb the determination of guilt.

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

PETERS, J.P., SPAIN, KAVANAGH, STEIN and McCARTHY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Robert Taylor v. Fischer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Sep 29, 2011
87 A.D.3d 1256 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In the Matter of Robert Taylor v. Fischer

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Robert TAYLOR, Petitioner,v.Brian FISCHER, as…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 2011

Citations

87 A.D.3d 1256 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 6630
929 N.Y.S.2d 891

Citing Cases

Jones v. Fischer

Respondent concedes that the determination of failing to comply with staff instructions regarding a…