From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

William v. Kafka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 27, 2006
31 A.D.3d 1078 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

99094.

July 27, 2006.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Clemente, J.), entered September 27, 2005 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondents refusing to expunge certain references from his institutional record.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


Petitioner, a prison inmate, initially made a self-referral to the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (hereinafter RSAT) program. Subsequently, his correction counselor also referred him to the RSAT program based upon a 1996 urinalysis misbehavior adjudication. Petitioner refused to participate in the RSAT program and his grievance regarding the counselor's referral was denied. After exhausting his administrative remedies, petitioner commenced this proceeding challenging the determination. Supreme Court ultimately dismissed petitioner's application to have the referral expunged from his institutional record. Petitioner now appeals.

Our review of the determination is limited to whether it is irrational, arbitrary or capricious ( see Matter of Matos v Goord, 27 AD3d 940, 941; Matter ofHarty v Goord, 3 AD3d 701, 702). Respondents relied upon petitioner's voluntary request for treatment, a previous disciplinary infraction involving a violation of urinalysis procedures and petitioner's criminal and institutional record in support of the determination that he requires the RSAT program. Inasmuch as these are legitimate reasons for referral under the directives of the Department of Correctional Services and the Department has considerable discretion in determining the program needs of inmates, we cannot conclude that respondents' determination was irrational, arbitrary or capricious. We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions, including his arguments that Supreme Court improperly expanded the scope of this proceeding and relied upon grounds beyond those relied upon by respondents, and find them unpersuasive.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

William v. Kafka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 27, 2006
31 A.D.3d 1078 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

William v. Kafka

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of WILLIAM MCKETHAN, Appellant, v. STEVEN KAFKA, as Senior…

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

Date published: Jul 27, 2006

Citations

31 A.D.3d 1078 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 6031
819 N.Y.S.2d 204

Citing Cases

Joseph v. Fischer

Frejomil v. Fischer, 68 AD3d 1371, 1372 (citations omitted). See Williams v. Goord, 41 AD3d 1118, lv den 9…

Rodriguez v. Goord

Following joinder of issue, Supreme Court dismissed the petition and petitioner appeals. It is the policy of…