From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McEachin v. Napoli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 26, 2008
56 A.D.3d 1089 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 504591.

November 26, 2008.

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 respondent Superintendent of Southport Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Guy McEachin, Attica, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Peters, J.P., Rose, Lahtinen, Kavanagh and Stein, JJ.


After he refused a correction officer's order to stop banging on his cell door, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with refusing a direct order and creating a disturbance. He was found guilty of the charges following a tier II disciplinary hearing and the determination was later affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. Petitioner confines his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the determination of guilt. Upon reviewing the record, we find that the misbehavior report, together with the videotape of the incident, provide the requisite substantial evidence to support the determination ( see Matter of Barclay v Goord, 23 AD3d 862, 862, lv denied 6 NY3d 710; Matter of Brown v Goord, 9 AD3d 646, 647, lv denied 3 NY3d 612). Therefore, we find no reason to disturb it.

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


Summaries of

McEachin v. Napoli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 26, 2008
56 A.D.3d 1089 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

McEachin v. Napoli

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF GUY McEACHIN, Petitioner, v. DAVID NAPOLI, as…

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

Date published: Nov 26, 2008

Citations

56 A.D.3d 1089 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9319
867 N.Y.S.2d 361

Citing Cases

Watkins v. Prack

We confirm. The misbehavior report and videotape of the incident provide substantial evidence to support the…

Jack Sweet v. Woods

We confirm. The determination of guilt is supported by substantial evidence in the form of the misbehavior…