From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Magee v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 6, 2003
303 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

92180

Decided and Entered: March 6, 2003.

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.

Mitchell Magee, Comstock, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Patrick Barnett-Mulligan of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and, Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting assault after a correction officer observed him grab a female visitor by the upper arm and force her down into a chair, apparently in an effort to prevent her from leaving. As charged in the misbehavior report, petitioner's action caused the woman to suffer a bloody scratch on the inside of her arm. The reporting officer related that although the woman was obviously upset, she declined to file charges against petitioner. Included in the evidence presented at petitioner's disciplinary hearing was the misbehavior report, the testimony of the reporting officer and that of a nurse from the facility's infirmary who treated the woman following her visit to petitioner. He confirmed that the woman had sustained a laceration on her upper arm which, she informed him, had occurred when she was "slammed * * * down in [a] chair." We find this sufficient to constitute substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see Matter of Smith v. Senkowski, 245 A.D.2d 909, 910, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 813). Although petitioner and his visitor testified that the injury was accidental, this presented an issue of credibility that lay within the discretionary power of the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Alejandro v. Goord, 278 A.D.2d 731). As substantial evidence supports the determination, it will not be disturbed. We have examined the remaining issues raised by petitioner, including his allegations of procedural errors and hearing officer bias, and find them to be meritless.

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Magee v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 6, 2003
303 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Magee v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF MITCHELL MAGEE, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Mar 6, 2003

Citations

303 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
755 N.Y.S.2d 330