Opinion
February 28, 1991
Appeal from the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.).
Defendant argues that he was subject to double jeopardy because the same incident gave rise to both a criminal indictment and a prison disciplinary proceeding. However, this court has specifically rejected the claim that institutional disciplinary proceedings preclude criminal charges on double jeopardy grounds (see, People v Frye, 144 A.D.2d 714, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 891; People v Lane, 132 A.D.2d 855, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 801) and, contrary to defendant's suggestion, we see no reason to reconsider our position.
Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.