From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re McGrue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 6, 1997
236 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

February 6, 1997.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in St. Lawrence County) to review a determination of respondent Director of Special Housing Unit, Department of Correctional Services, which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, White and Peters, JJ.


Petitioner, a prison inmate, was found guilty, after a hearing, of assaulting another inmate. He challenges this determination arguing, inter alia, that it is not supported by substantial evidence, that he was denied the right to call certain witnesses, and that the Hearing Officer was biased.

Initially, the misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the correction officer who prepared it and that of another correction officer who was involved in investigating the incident, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination. Both officers stated that the victim of the assault identified petitioner as one of his assailants. Although petitioner claimed that he was playing basketball and was not involved in the incident, his testimony merely presented a question of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see, Matter of Young v Coombe, 227 AD2d 799, 801; Matter of Ayala v Coombe, 227 AD2d 752, 753).

We also reject petitioner's claim that he was denied the right to have certain witnesses testify at the hearing. While petitioner argues that he was denied the right to elicit the victim's testimony, the record discloses that petitioner never formally requested the victim as a witness, and that those witnesses he did request, who were available to testify, were indeed called and examined at the hearing. Moreover, the hearing transcript reveals that the Hearing Officer conducted the proceeding in a fair and impartial manner ( see, Matter of Ruffin v Coombe, 233 AD2d 729; Matter of McCoy v Leonardo, 175 AD2d 358, 359). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.

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


Summaries of

In re McGrue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 6, 1997
236 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

In re McGrue

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Feb 6, 1997

Citations

236 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
653 N.Y.S.2d 719

Citing Cases

Sime v. Department of Correctional Services

The letter was signed by "Sisco" and matched two samples of petitioner's handwriting. This proof, coupled…

Matter of Rodriguez v. Coombe

Were we to consider this claim, we would find it meritless, given the fact that the witness's testimony…