From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Matter of Todd Chaney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 22, 2007
37 A.D.3d 983 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 500465.

February 22, 2007.

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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Todd Chaney, Attica, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Mugglin and Kane, JJ.


Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with violating several prison disciplinary rules after a law library clerk retrieved a book from his cell. The book contained a manilla folder of legal work belonging to another inmate, along with an unsigned cover letter to that inmate describing the accompanying documents. After a hearing, petitioner was found not guilty of two charges but found guilty of providing unauthorized legal assistance. Following an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this proceeding.

The misbehavior report, documents found in the manilla folder and the testimony of both the correction officer who discovered the documents and the library clerk provide substantial evidence to support the charge ( see Matter of Hynes v Goord, 30 AD3d 652, 653). Conflicts in the testimony presented credibility issues for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see Matter of Chaney v Selsky, 35 AD3d 1109, 1110).

Regarding petitioner's timeliness challenges, the two-week delay in writing the misbehavior report was explained by the author's testimony that he needed to investigate to ensure that this conduct was not included in previous charges against petitioner for providing unauthorized legal assistance ( see Matter of Reed v Goord, 16 AD3d 796, 796). Although the hearing was not completed within 14 days, we recently stated in a related matter that "the regulatory time limits are directory, not mandatory; further, there is no evidence of any prejudice as a result of the delay" ( Matter of Chaney v Selsky, supra at 1110; see Matter of Chaney v Goord, 26 AD3d 605, 606-607). In any event, extensions of time were obtained to complete the hearing ( see 7 NYCRR 251-5.1 [b]).

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


Summaries of

In re Matter of Todd Chaney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 22, 2007
37 A.D.3d 983 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

In re Matter of Todd Chaney

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TODD CHANEY, Petitioner, v. DONALD SELSKY, as Director of…

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

Date published: Feb 22, 2007

Citations

37 A.D.3d 983 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 1434
830 N.Y.S.2d 605

Citing Cases

Wigfall v. Goord

We confirm. Substantial evidence consisting of the misbehavior report and testimony adduced at the hearing…

McAllister v. Fischer

Contrary to petitioner's assertion, there is no requirement that the misbehavior report be prepared the same…