From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Knight v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 28, 2005
20 A.D.3d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

July 28, 2005.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Chemung County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur.


In the course of an authorized mail watch, correction officials intercepted a letter sent by petitioner to a third party in which he made coded references to gang-related activity. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with violating facility correspondence procedures and engaging in unauthorized organizational activities. He was found guilty of the charges following a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

The misbehavior report, letter and confidential testimony taken by the Hearing Officer in camera constitute substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Roman v. Goord, 284 AD2d 604, 605; Matter of Martinez v Selsky, 274 AD2d 726). We find no merit to petitioner's claim that he was denied adequate employee assistance inasmuch as the documents the assistant failed to provide were either nonexistent, irrelevant or confidential in nature ( see Matter of Antinuche v. Goord, 16 AD3d 743, 744; Matter of Cliff v. Selsky, 293 AD2d 885, 885). Notably, petitioner was provided an opportunity at the hearing to review the letter and the envelope. Contrary to petitioner's claim, he was not entitled access to the transcript of the confidential testimony as it implicated matters bearing upon institutional security ( see Matter of Garcia v. Selsky, 15 AD3d 813, 814; Matter of Mata v. Goord, 250 AD2d 907). His remaining contentions are either unpreserved for our review or are lacking in merit.

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


Summaries of

In the Matter of Knight v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 28, 2005
20 A.D.3d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

In the Matter of Knight v. Selsky

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jul 28, 2005

Citations

20 A.D.3d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
798 N.Y.S.2d 810

Citing Cases

Telesford v. Annucci

The determination of guilt is not supported by substantial evidence, as the misbehavior report, hearing…

Tafari v. Selsky

The reports were sufficiently detailed to apprise petitioner of the charges against him and provide him with…