From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Bettis v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 7, 1992
186 A.D.2d 1080 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 7, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Pine, Lawton, Boehm and Doerr, JJ.


Determination unanimously modified on the law and as modified confirmed and matter remitted to respondent Superintendent for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: The determination that petitioner violated Inmate Rule 104.10 (participating in a riot) is annulled and reference to it is expunged from petitioner's institutional records. The misbehavior report, which was the only evidence presented against petitioner, alleged only petitioner's presence on the scene and failed to contain a "particularized individual description of misconduct" by which petitioner was alleged to have participated in a riot. As such, the report did not constitute substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Bryant v Coughlin, 77 N.Y.2d 642). Because our determination is based upon lack of substantial evidence, respondents are not entitled to a rehearing to attempt to correct the deficiency in the proof (see, Matter of Laureano v Kuhlmann, 75 N.Y.2d 141, 148; Matter of Hartje v Coughlin, 70 N.Y.2d 866). The matter is remitted to respondent Superintendent to impose an appropriate punishment on the charge to which petitioner entered a plea of guilty.


Summaries of

Matter of Bettis v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 7, 1992
186 A.D.2d 1080 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Bettis v. Coughlin

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MICHAEL BETTIS, Petitioner, v. THOMAS A. COUGHLIN, as…

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

Date published: Oct 7, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 1080 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

Matter of Williams v. Coughlin

Second, in this case, the Hearing Officer did not have to rely on the second-hand, blanket statements of…

Matter of Urgitano v. Coughlin

Present — Pine, J.P., Balio, Lawton, Boomer and Davis, JJ. Determination unanimously annulled on the law and…