From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Zambrana v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 18, 1998
251 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 18, 1998


Petitioner, a prison inmate, was found guilty of exchanging a controlled substance in violation of a prison disciplinary rule. Introduced into evidence at his disciplinary hearing were two letters confiscated from another inmate indicating that an inmate known as "Pulpo" owed a drug-related debt to another individual named "Columbia". The correction officer who investigated the matter and authored the misbehavior report testified that a confidential informant identified petitioner as "Pulpo". This proof, together with the testimony of an inmate witness confirming that petitioner's nickname was "Pulpo", provides substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt ( see, Matter of Harrison v. Selsky, 222 A.D.2d 914, appeal dismissed 87 N.Y.2d 1054). Finally, we reject petitioner's contention that the Hearing Officer failed to independently assess the reliability of the confidential source. Although the confidential informant did not testify, the information relayed by the correction officer was sufficiently detailed to enable the Hearing Officer to make an independent credibility assessment ( see, Matter of Lyde v. Senkowski, 239 A.D.2d 714; Matter of Green v. Coughlin, 225 A.D.2d 812). We have reviewed the remaining contentions advanced by petitioner and find them to be either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., White, Peters, Spain and Graffeo, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Matter of Zambrana v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 18, 1998
251 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Matter of Zambrana v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RAUL ZAMBRANA, Petitioner, v. GLENN GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Jun 18, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
674 N.Y.S.2d 511

Citing Cases

Matter of Thomas v. Selsky

Notably, there is no requirement that the Hearing Officer personally interview the confidential informant in…