From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Barto v. Berbary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 2003
2 A.D.3d 1328 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

TP 03-01114.

December 31, 2003.

CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Pietruszka, J.), entered December 13, 2002, to review a determination of respondents after a Tier II hearing.

BRUCE BARTO, PETITIONER PRO SE.

ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (PATRICK BARNETT-MULLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS.

Before: PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., SCUDDER, GORSKI, LAWTON, AND HAYES, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by granting the petition in part and annulling that part of the determination finding that petitioner violated inmate rule 113.23 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xiv]) and as modified the determination is confirmed without costs, and respondents are directed to expunge from petitioner's institutional record all references thereto.

Memorandum: As respondents correctly concede, the determination finding that petitioner violated inmate rule 113.23 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xiv]) is not supported by substantial evidence. However, the plea of guilty by petitioner to violating inmate rule 113.14 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [v]) precludes his present challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting that charge ( see Matter of Fuller v. Goord, 299 A.D.2d 849, lv dismissed 100 N.Y.2d 531). We therefore modify the determination by granting the petition in part and annulling that part of the determination finding that petitioner violated inmate rule 113.23, and we direct respondents to expunge from petitioner's institutional record all references thereto. Because the penalty has been served, there is no need to remit the matter to respondents for reconsideration of the penalty imposed ( see Matter of Maybanks v. Goord, 306 A.D.2d 839). Finally, petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to his contention that he was improperly confined to the special housing unit prior to the issuance of the misbehavior report ( see Matter of Johnson v. Ricks, 278 A.D.2d 559, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 710).


Summaries of

In the Matter of Barto v. Berbary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 2003
2 A.D.3d 1328 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

In the Matter of Barto v. Berbary

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF BRUCE BARTO, PETITIONER, v. JAMES L. BERBARY, SUPERINTENDENT…

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

Date published: Dec 31, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 1328 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
769 N.Y.S.2d 414

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Cross v. Goord

Respondent concedes that the determination finding that petitioner violated inmate rules 113.20 ( 7 NYCRR…