From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Price v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 30, 2003
301 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

91931

January 30, 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 which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Mark Price, Ossining, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Andrea Oser of counsel), for respondent.

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


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a determination of respondent finding him guilty of violating the disciplinary rules against smuggling, drug possession and violating visiting room procedures. According to the misbehavior report, while petitioner was in the visiting room area, he was observed reaching in his pants and placing something in the container of chicken in front of him. Upon investigating, a red balloon filled with marihuana was found in the chicken container. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report, the videotape and the testimony at the hearing, together with the inferences to be drawn therefrom, provide substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see Matter of Morales v. Goord, 290 A.D.2d 790; see also Matter of Torres v. Coughlin, 213 A.D.2d 861). Petitioner's assertion that the container was not his created a credibility determination to be resolved by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Morales v. Goord, supra). Furthermore, although the videotape does not show petitioner reaching in the back of his pants, as is related in the misbehavior report, other inmates were blocking the camera's view of petitioner. Nevertheless, the videotape does capture petitioner's suspicious behavior. Petitioner's remaining contentions, including that he was denied the opportunity to refute evidence at the hearing and his claim of hearing officer bias, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Peters, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Price v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 30, 2003
301 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Price v. Goord

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jan 30, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
754 N.Y.S.2d 453

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Morgan v. Goord

Petitioner then denied that it came from him. The misbehavior report, testimony at the hearing and the…

In the Matter of Brown v. Goord

The record does not show that any contraband was recovered. The misbehavior reports, as well as the videotape…