From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Watkins v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 10, 2003
307 A.D.2d 503 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

93182

Decided and Entered: July 10, 2003.

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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Leonza Watkins, Malone, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Marlene O. Tuczinski of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Spain and, Carpinello, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules prohibiting the possession of narcotics and smuggling. According to the misbehavior report, the charges stem from an investigation conducted by the Inspector General's office indicating that petitioner had been selling heroin obtained from his wife during visits. While in the facility, petitioner's wife was searched and found to be in possession of heroin.

Included in the evidence presented at petitioner's disciplinary hearing was the misbehavior report and the testimony given by the investigator who prepared it, together with the confidential information gleaned from the investigation, which was reviewed in camera by the Hearing Officer. The record indicates that the Hearing Officer made the required independent assessment that the information was reliable and credible (see Matter of Gutierrez v. Murphy, 285 A.D.2d 783, 784; Matter of Olave v. Goord, 251 A.D.2d 794, 795). We conclude that substantial evidence supported the determination of petitioner's guilt (see Matter of Jimenez v. Goord, 264 A.D.2d 918, 919; Matter of Long v. Department of Correctional Servs. of N.Y., 252 A.D.2d 698).

Notwithstanding petitioner's arguments to the contrary, we find that the misbehavior report was sufficiently detailed to enable him to prepare an adequate defense (see Matter of Abdur-Raheem v. Mann, 85 N.Y.2d 113, 123; Matter of Jackson v. Portuondo, 288 A.D.2d 733). Information regarding the names of his alleged coconspirators and the dates they conspired was properly withheld from petitioner based upon concerns of compromising the efficacy of the ongoing investigation and jeopardizing the safety of the facility (see Matter of McDermott v. Selsky, 288 A.D.2d 669). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Watkins v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 10, 2003
307 A.D.2d 503 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Watkins v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF LEONZA WATKINS, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, AS…

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

Date published: Jul 10, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 503 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
761 N.Y.S.2d 560

Citing Cases

Charles v. Selsky

Petitioner thereafter commenced this proceeding, subsequently transferred to this Court, seeking to annul the…

In the Matter of Bossett v. Portuondo

Initially, we are unpersuaded by petitioner's contention that the statement of charges in the misbehavior…