Opinion
No. CV-23-1809
04-18-2024
In the Matter of Anthony Davis, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. Annucci, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
Anthony Davis, Alden, petitioner pro se. Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.
Calendar Date: March 22, 2024
Anthony Davis, Alden, petitioner pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald, McShan and Powers, JJ.
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 finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner, an incarcerated individual, was charged in a misbehavior report with violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit making threats and engaging in conduct involving the threat of violence. According to the misbehavior report, an investigation into petitioner's telephone use revealed that, in November 2022, he expressed anger toward staff at the correctional facility and stated, "I want to come back up and kill these people." Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of the charges. The determination was upheld upon administrative appeal, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report and hearing testimony, as well as the telephone recording submitted for in camera review, provide substantial evidence to support the determination finding petitioner guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit making threats and engaging in conduct involving the threat of violence (see Matter of Vicente v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision, 107 A.D.3d 1203, 1203 [3d Dept 2013]; Matter of Griswold v Goord, 39 A.D.3d 908, 909 [3d Dept 2007]; Matter of Walker v Goord, 266 A.D.2d 778, 778 [3d Dept 1999]). "In addition, petitioner's claim that the threat was not real presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve" (Matter of Griswold v Goord, 39 A.D.3d at 909 [citations omitted]). To the extent petitioner's remaining contentions are properly before us, they have been considered and found to be without merit.
Garry, P.J., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald, McShan and Powers, JJ., concur.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.