From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Polite v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 6, 2008
49 A.D.3d 944 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 502969.

March 6, 2008.

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.

Eric Polite, Ogdensburg, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Carpinello and Rose, JJ.


Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of making threats, being out of place, leaving an assigned area and violating the movement regulations. Respondent modified the determination upon administrative appeal by dismissing the threats charge, but otherwise affirmed the determination and did not reduce the penalty imposed. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

Although petitioner arguably raised the issue of substantial evidence in the petition and, therefore, the proceeding was properly transferred to this Court, he has since abandoned this claim by not raising it in his brief ( see Matter of Coleman v Goord, 39 AD3d 1048, 1048 n [2007]).

Petitioner contends that he was denied adequate employee assistance and that he was improperly denied the right to call certain witnesses. However, the only objections petitioner made at the hearing were with respect to the denial of witnesses he requested to testify regarding the incident leading to the threats charge. Likewise, petitioner's claim of inadequate assistance is directed solely to the assistance as it pertained to the threats charge. Inasmuch as that charge was dismissed upon administrative appeal, petitioner's claims with respect to such are moot ( see Matter of May v Selsky, 291 AD2d 591, 592). Moreover, because petitioner did not object at the hearing to the alleged denial of his witnesses with respect to the remaining charges, this claim is not preserved for our review ( see Matter of Tafari v Brown, 47 AD3d 979; Matter of Carter v Goord, 45 AD3d 1077, 1078).

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


Summaries of

Polite v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 6, 2008
49 A.D.3d 944 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Polite v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ERIC POLITE, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Mar 6, 2008

Citations

49 A.D.3d 944 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1890
853 N.Y.S.2d 211

Citing Cases

Samuel v. Fischer

We confirm. Petitioner's plea of guilty with explanation to the charges of possessing contraband and…

Roussopoulas v. Cunningham

Although petitioner denied fighting with the other inmate and claimed that he acted in self-defense, this…