From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vanier v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 7, 2001
284 A.D.2d 598 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

June 7, 2001.

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.

Joseph Vanier, Pine City, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Wayne L. Benjamin of counsel), Albany, for respondents.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating a facility correspondence procedure and refusing a direct order. Initially, the Attorney-General concedes, and based on our review of the record we agree, that there is insufficient evidence to support the charge of refusing a direct order. Accordingly, this charge must be annulled and expunged from petitioner's institutional record and, inasmuch as the penalty imposed included a loss of good time, the matter must be remitted to respondents for a redetermination of the penalty imposed (see, Matter of Hall v. Goord, 274 A.D.2d 722). Turning to the remaining charge, we note that petitioner pleaded guilty to violating a facility correspondence procedure and, as such, he is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the determination of guilt in connection therewith (see, Matter of Rollerson v. Selsky, 281 A.D.2d 735, 721 N.Y.S.2d 295). Petitioner's remaining claims are unpreserved for review (see, Matter of Kross v. Goord, 278 A.D.2d 637) and, in any event, are lacking in merit.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is modified, without costs, by annulling so much thereof as found petitioner guilty of the charge of refusing a direct order; petition granted to that extent, respondents are directed to expunge all references thereto from petitioner's institutional record and matter remitted to respondents for redetermination of the penalty imposed on the remaining violation; and, as so modified, confirmed.


Summaries of

Vanier v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 7, 2001
284 A.D.2d 598 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Vanier v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOSEPH VANIER, Petitioner, v. GLENN GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Jun 7, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 598 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
725 N.Y.S.2d 578

Citing Cases

Van Bramer v. Selsky

Hence, so much of the determination as found petitioner guilty of solicitation is annulled and will be…

Coppola v. Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr.

Therefore, it was not simply ministerial in nature. As for that branch of petitioners' amended petition…