From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnes v. Annucci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Jul 30, 2020
185 A.D.3d 1367 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

530226

07-30-2020

In the Matter of Arrello BARNES, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

Arrello Barnes, Alden, petitioner pro se. Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.


Arrello Barnes, Alden, petitioner pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Mulvey, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Rich Jr., J.), entered September 23, 2019, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Following a tier III hearing, petitioner was found guilty of violating various prison disciplinary rules, and a penalty was imposed. Petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge that determination, contending – as relevant here – that the hearing transcript was incomplete. After respondent answered, Supreme Court dismissed petitioner's application, finding, among other things, that the amended hearing transcript belied petitioner's claim that there was testimony missing from the administrative record. This appeal ensued.

We affirm. The record does not support petitioner's assertion that the Hearing Officer failed to electronically record the entire hearing (see Matter of Partak v. Venettozzi, 175 A.D.3d 1633, 1635, 109 N.Y.S.3d 481 [2019] ; Matter of Boyd v. Prack, 136 A.D.3d 1136, 1136–1137, 24 N.Y.S.3d 457 [2016] ), and the intermittent gaps in the hearing transcripts "are not so pervasive as to preclude meaningful review" ( Matter of Liggan v. Annucci, 171 A.D.3d 1325, 1326, 97 N.Y.S.3d 805 [2019] ; see Matter of McFarlane v. Annucci, 176 A.D.3d 1277, 1278, 109 N.Y.S.3d 765 [2019] ). Petitioner's remaining arguments, including his claim of hearing officer bias, are either unpreserved for our review or have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Mulvey, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Barnes v. Annucci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Jul 30, 2020
185 A.D.3d 1367 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

Barnes v. Annucci

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Arrello Barnes, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. Annucci, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 30, 2020

Citations

185 A.D.3d 1367 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 4357
126 N.Y.S.3d 428

Citing Cases

Mojica v. Keyser

To the extent that petitioner contends that, had he in fact been wearing his wife's sneakers during the…

Mojica v. Keyser

To the extent that petitioner contends that, had he in fact been wearing his wife's sneakers during the…