From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Pryce v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

July 20, 2000.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lahtinen, J.), entered September 27, 1999 in Franklin County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Superintendent of Franklin Correctional Facility finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Winston Pryce, Malone, for appellant.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Marcus Mastracco of counsel), Albany, for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain, Graffeo and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Prefatorily, as one of the issues raised is whether the administrative determination is supported by substantial evidence, Supreme Court should have transferred the proceeding to this court (see, CPLR 7804 [g]; Matter of Odom v. Goord, 271 A.D.2d 792, 707 N.Y.S.2d 248). However, as the matter is now before us, we will decide the issue as if it had been transferred in the first instance (see, id.).

Following a tier II hearing, petitioner, a prison inmate, was found guilty of refusing a direct order. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report and the testimony by the correction officer who authored the report provide substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Thomas v. Bennett, 271 A.D.2d 768, 705 N.Y.S.2d 445). We also reject petitioner's contention that the Hearing Officer was biased. Our review discloses that the hearing was conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Petitioner's requests were denied only in instances where the requested evidence would have been irrelevant to the issue of his guilt in connection with the charged violation (see, Matter of McBride v. Selsky, 257 A.D.2d 930; Matter of Smith v. Senkowski, 245 A.D.2d 909, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 813). We have reviewed petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Pryce v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Pryce v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF WINSTON PRYCE, Appellant, v. GLENN GOORD, as Commissioner…

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

Date published: Jul 20, 2000

Citations

274 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
710 N.Y.S.2d 485

Citing Cases

Tumminia v. Senkowski

Substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt was presented in the form of the misbehavior report and the…

Matter of Green v. McGinnis

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules…