From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 17, 1996
232 A.D.2d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

October 17, 1996.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lewis, J.), entered November 22, 1995 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Before: Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ.


After engaging in a fist fight with another inmate, petitioner pleaded guilty to creating a disturbance and assaulting an inmate. He was sentenced to 36 months in the special housing unit, loss of privileges for the same period of time and 18 months loss of good time. Upon administrative appeal, the penalty was modified to 18 months in the special housing unit, loss of privileges for the same period of time and 18 months loss of good time. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the modified penalty as excessive. Supreme Court upheld the penalty and dismissed the petition.

Given the serious nature of petitioner's conduct, we do not find that the penalty imposed upon petitioner was excessive ( see, Matter of Hoyer v Coombe, 224 AD2d 879). Moreover, based upon our review of the record, we find no merit to petitioner's claim that the penalty was imposed in retaliation for petitioner's failure to cooperate in an investigation of an unrelated inmate homicide. Consequently, we find no reason to disturb the administrative determination.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 17, 1996
232 A.D.2d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

In re Selsky

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES DURLAND, Appellant, v. DONALD SELSKY, as Director…

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

Date published: Oct 17, 1996

Citations

232 A.D.2d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
649 N.Y.S.2d 60

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Lebron

Nor was it improper to preclude petitioner from pursuing certain lines of questioning. This record confirms…

In re Irwin

We find the 30-month penalty initially imposed troubling in light of petitioner's submissions documenting the…