From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peters v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 1, 2001
280 A.D.2d 738 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

February 1, 2001.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Raymond Peters, Elmira, petitioner in person.

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

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Spain and Mugglin, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting assaults. The misbehavior report related that, according to confidential information received by the correction officer who authored the report, it was petitioner who cut another inmate's face in retaliation for an overdue gambling debt, requiring the inmate to receive 23 stitches. Contrary to petitioner's assertion, the Hearing Officer was not required to personally interview the confidential informant (see, Matter of Abdur-Raheem v. Mann, 85 N.Y.2d 113; Matter of Vega v. Goord, 274 A.D.2d 807). The confidential information relayed that the informant witnessed the attack, identified petitioner as the perpetrator and described the manner in which petitioner cut the inmate. This confidential information was sufficiently detailed and probative for the Hearing Officer to assess the credibility of the informant (see, Matter of Matos v. Goord, 267 A.D.2d 730, 731). The confidential information, together with the misbehavior report and testimony presented at the hearing, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see, id.). To the extent that petitioner denied the charge, this created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of West v. Goord, ___ A.D.2d ___, 716 N.Y.S.2d 620).

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


Summaries of

Peters v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 1, 2001
280 A.D.2d 738 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Peters v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RAYMOND PETERS, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Feb 1, 2001

Citations

280 A.D.2d 738 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
720 N.Y.S.2d 596

Citing Cases

Le Tam v. Goord

The report, combined with the testimony adduced at the hearing, including the confidential testimony of the…

Santiago v. Goord

Turning to the remaining charge, we find substantial evidence in the record to support the determination of…