From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Curry v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Mar 16, 2017
148 A.D.3d 1395 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

03-16-2017

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

John Curry, Auburn, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.


John Curry, Auburn, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

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 the Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with refusing a direct order and failing to follow lock-in procedures after he twice disregarded a correction officer's directive to lock in his cell, which required that the correction officer leave his post and escort petitioner to his cell. Following a tier II disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of both charges and that determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

The misbehavior report and testimony at the hearing, including that of the correction officer involved in the incident, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Bailey v. Prack, 125 A.D.3d 1028, 1028, 999 N.Y.S.2d 767 [2015] ; Matter of Tarbell v. Prack, 89 A.D.3d 1342, 1343, 934 N.Y.S.2d 522 [2011] ). As a prison inmate, petitioner was required to promptly comply with the directive to lock in his cell (see Matter of Bailey v. Prack, 125 A.D.3d at 1028, 999 N.Y.S.2d 767 ). To the extent that petitioner denied the incident, this created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Bermudez v. Griffin, 142 A.D.3d 1203, 1204, 37 N.Y.S.3d 468 [2016] ; Matter of Batten v. Goord, 258 A.D.2d 794, 794, 684 N.Y.S.2d 445 [1999] ). Petitioner's procedural contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

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

PETERS, P.J., McCARTHY, EGAN JR., LYNCH and AARONS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Curry v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Mar 16, 2017
148 A.D.3d 1395 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Curry v. Annucci

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of John CURRY, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 16, 2017

Citations

148 A.D.3d 1395 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 1938
48 N.Y.S.3d 638

Citing Cases

Haigler v. Keyser

As for the determination finding petitioner guilty of refusing a direct order, unauthorized exchange, forgery…