From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 12, 2008
52 A.D.3d 1005 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

June 12, 2008.

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 which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Peters, Rose, Malone Jr. and Stein, JJ.


Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting illicit drug use. That determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal, although the penalty imposed was reduced. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, the hearing testimony and the urinalysis test report, together with the related documentation, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Lopez v Goord, 49 AD3d 1044, 1045; Matter of Allred v Goord, 48 AD3d 847, 848). Contrary to petitioner's contention, he was provided with access to all of the available documentation that he requested ( see Matter of Lebron v Artus, 48 AD3d 993, 995; Matter of Smith v Goord, 45 AD3d 1119, 1120). There is no support in the record for petitioner's claim that the Hearing Officer was biased, nor is there an indication that the determination of guilt flowed from any alleged bias ( see Matter of Williams v Selsky, 50 AD3d 1426, 1427; Matter of Freeman v Leclaire, 50 AD3d 1329). To the extent preserved, petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

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


Summaries of

In re Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 12, 2008
52 A.D.3d 1005 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

In re Williams

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMEEL WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. BRIAN FISCHER, as…

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

Date published: Jun 12, 2008

Citations

52 A.D.3d 1005 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
860 N.Y.S.2d 238

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Carlos Pujals v. Fischer

We do not agree with petitioner's contention that he was improperly denied daily worksheets of his past…