From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Di Rose v. Pico

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 5, 1998
247 A.D.2d 687 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

February 5, 1998


Petitioner, a prison inmate, challenges the determination continuing his placement for an indefinite period of time in the administrative segregation housing unit (SHU) at Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Ulster County. Petitioner contends that the determination was not based upon substantial evidence that he poses a threat to the safety and security of the facility (see, 7 NYCRR 301.4 [b]). We disagree.

Adduced in evidence at the administrative hearing was information provided by an investigator from the Inspector General's office, stating that an ongoing confidential investigation had uncovered petitioner's participation in various illegal activities while he was a member of the general prison population. It was recommended that petitioner's placement in SHU be continued in order to curtail this misconduct. We find this information sufficient to constitute the requisite substantial evidence in support of the determination under review (see, Matter of Cowart v. Pico, 241 A.D.2d 723). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his assertion of Hearing Officer bias and his unsupported allegation that he was assigned to SHU in retaliation for various actions on the part of petitioner and his attorney, have been examined and found to be without merit (see, Matter of Hill v. Coombe, 227 A.D.2d 706, 707).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White and Carpinello, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Di Rose v. Pico

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 5, 1998
247 A.D.2d 687 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Di Rose v. Pico

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RICARDO A. DI ROSE, Petitioner, v. JOSE PICO et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 5, 1998

Citations

247 A.D.2d 687 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
669 N.Y.S.2d 65

Citing Cases

Matter of Torres v. Doling

We confirm. Upon review of the record, we conclude that the record contains substantial evidence to support…

Roe v. Selsky

Given the particular circumstances presented here, we conclude that petitioner was provided sufficient notice…