From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 13, 2002
295 A.D.2d 710 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

89393

June 13, 2002.

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 the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Raymond Rodriguez, Napanoch, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and, Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting fighting. The correction officer who authored the misbehavior report testified that he had observed petitioner fighting with two other inmates. As the officer approached the inmates, petitioner fled, but was soon found hiding in a nearby bathroom. The officer was able to identify petitioner by checking his identification card and file photograph. Petitioner was taken to the infirmary where he was found to have sustained abrasions on his head and body and cuts and scrapes on his face and right hand.

We find that substantial evidence in the form of the misbehavior report, the testimony of the reporting officer who witnessed the charged misconduct and the inmate injury report, issued by the infirmary, supports the determination of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Lunney v. Selsky, 275 A.D.2d 820; Matter of Quintana v. Selsky, 268 A.D.2d 624, 625). Petitioner's testimony, in which he stated that he was present but did not participate in the fight and that his injuries were caused when the other inmates "trampled" him as he attempted to leave, raised issues of credibility for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see, Matter of Pena v. Goord, 290 A.D.2d 624; Matter of Jimenez v. Selsky, 274 A.D.2d 704, 705). The remaining contentions raised herein, including petitioner's assertion of Hearing Officer bias, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 13, 2002
295 A.D.2d 710 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Selsky

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RAYMOND RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. DONALD R. SELSKY, as…

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

Date published: Jun 13, 2002

Citations

295 A.D.2d 710 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
743 N.Y.S.2d 748