From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nova v. Kirkpatrick

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 26, 2018
160 A.D.3d 1326 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

525484

04-26-2018

In the Matter of Julio NOVA, Petitioner, v. Michael KIRKPATRICK, as Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Julio Nova, Attica, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondents.


Julio Nova, Attica, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondents.

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Devine, Clark, Aarons and Pritzker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENTProceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

After petitioner was moved to another cell, a correction officer assigned to pack up his cell found a plastic shank-like object that was sharpened at one end. Petitioner was thereafter charged in a misbehavior report with possession of a weapon. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of the charge. The determination was upheld on administrative appeal, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, testimony of the correction officer who found the weapon and a photograph of the weapon provide substantial evidence to support the determination (see Matter of Miller v. Venettozzi , 149 A.D.3d 1451, 1451, 51 N.Y.S.3d 271 [2017] ; Matter of Thompson v. Annucci , 145 A.D.3d 1303, 1304, 43 N.Y.S.3d 607 [2016] ). Petitioner's denial that there was a weapon in his cell and claims that the weapon was planted in retaliation for a recent grievance he had filed against another officer, which were explored at the hearing and denied by the testifying officers, created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Ramos v. Annucci , 150 A.D.3d 1510, 1511, 54 N.Y.S.3d 755 [2017] ).

Contrary to petitioner's claim, he was not denied meaningful assistance from his employee assistant. Any claim regarding witnesses who refused to testify when interviewed by the employee assistant, and were not thereafter requested as witnesses by petitioner at the hearing, is unpreserved (see Matter of Davis v. Annucci , 140 A.D.3d 1432, 1433, 36 N.Y.S.3d 896 [2016], appeal dismissed 28 N.Y.3d 1109, 45 N.Y.S.3d 352, 68 N.E.3d 77 [2016] ; Matter of Rodriguez v. Fischer, 138 A.D.3d 1328, 1329, 28 N.Y.S.3d 636 [2016] ).

Finally, while there are many inaudible gaps in the hearing transcript, we do not find that they are "so significant as to preclude meaningful [judicial] review" ( Matter of Robinson v. Lee , 155 A.D.3d 1169, 1170, 62 N.Y.S.3d 820 [2017] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and, to the extent that they are preserved, have been found to be without merit.

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

McCarthy, J.P., Devine, Clark, Aarons and Pritzker, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Nova v. Kirkpatrick

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 26, 2018
160 A.D.3d 1326 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

Nova v. Kirkpatrick

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Julio NOVA, Petitioner, v. Michael KIRKPATRICK, as…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 26, 2018

Citations

160 A.D.3d 1326 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
160 A.D.3d 1326
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 2862

Citing Cases

Pierre v. Annucci

We confirm. Initially, the misbehavior report, together with the photographic evidence of the weapon and the…

Harrell v. Annucci

Contrary to petitioner's assertion, the video of the incident is inconclusive, as the view of petitioner and…