From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Odom v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 13, 2000
271 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

April 13, 2000.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Berke, J.), entered August 12, 1999 in Washington County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Jonathan Odom, Attica, appellant in person.

Before: CREW III, J.P., PETERS, SPAIN, GRAFFEO and MUGGLIN, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Prefatorily, as one of the issues raised is whether the determination was supported by substantial evidence, Supreme Court should have transferred this proceeding to this court (see, CPLR 7804 [g]; Matter of Abdul-Matiyn v. Commissioner, State of N.Y., Dept. of Correctional Servs., 250 A.D.2d 1009, 1010). However, as the matter is now before us, we will decide the issue as if it had been properly transferred in the first instance (see, id., at 1010).

Petitioner, a prison inmate, was found guilty of disobeying a direct order. We reject petitioner's contention that the misbehavior report, standing alone, was insufficient to constitute substantial evidence of his guilt. The misbehavior report, authored by the correction officer who witnessed the incident, stated that petitioner was instructed to move to a special housing unit and that he refused to obey the order several times. In our view, this detailed and probative misbehavior report constitutes substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Herbin v. Lacy, 252 A.D.2d 608, 609; Matter of Cadiz v. Goord, 241 A.D.2d 687). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claims that he did not receive meaningful assistance, that he was denied his right to call witnesses and that the hearing was not concluded in a timely fashion, have been examined and found to be without merit.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Odom v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 13, 2000
271 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Odom v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the JONATHAN ODOM, Appellant, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Apr 13, 2000

Citations

271 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
707 N.Y.S.2d 248

Citing Cases

Wingate v. State

udicial immunity where "(t)here (were) no factual allegations by the claimant that named defendants were…

Matter of Pryce v. Goord

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Prefatorily, as one of the issues raised is whether the administrative determination is…