From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. Prack

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Jul 31, 2014
119 A.D.3d 1309 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-07-31

In the Matter of Justin ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. Albert PRACK, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Justin Robinson, Malone, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.



Justin Robinson, Malone, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., LAHTINEN, STEIN, ROSE and DEVINE, JJ.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Franklin County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in three misbehavior reports with violating various prison disciplinary rules, including possession of narcotics. At a tier III disciplinary hearing covering all of the reports, petitioner pleaded guilty to all charges. He was thereafter found guilty as charged, and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. Petitioner is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the determination of guilt in light of his guilty pleas to all charges ( see Matter of Tingling v. Fischer, 108 A.D.3d 989, 990, 968 N.Y.S.2d 915 [2013];Matter of Perez v. Bezio, 98 A.D.3d 1148, 1149, 950 N.Y.S.2d 796 [2012] ). Further, his claims that the proper testing procedures were not followed in determining that he possessed narcotics are irrelevant due to his guilty pleas ( see Matter of Tingling v. Fischer, 108 A.D.3d at 990, 968 N.Y.S.2d 915). Finally, petitioner's claim that he was not provided adequate employee assistance is unpreserved for our review, inasmuch as he did not raise it at the hearing ( see Matter of Abrams v. Fischer, 109 A.D.3d 1030, 1031, 971 N.Y.S.2d 361 [2013];Matter of Fordham v. Lee, 96 A.D.3d 1243, 1243–1244, 946 N.Y.S.2d 901 [2012] ) and in his administrative appeal ( see Matter of Cagle v. Fischer, 108 A.D.3d 913, 913, 968 N.Y.S.2d 415 [2013];Matter of Harris v. Selsky, 9 A.D.3d 695, 696, 780 N.Y.S.2d 94 [2004] ). Petitioner's remaining claims either have not been preserved for our review or are lacking in merit.

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


Summaries of

Robinson v. Prack

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Jul 31, 2014
119 A.D.3d 1309 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Robinson v. Prack

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Justin ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. Albert PRACK, as Director…

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

Date published: Jul 31, 2014

Citations

119 A.D.3d 1309 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
119 A.D.3d 1309
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 5593

Citing Cases

Sanchez v. Annucci

Both determinations were affirmed on administrative appeal, prompting this proceeding. We confirm. With…

Ramos v. Annucci

Petitioner was found guilty as charged, and that determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. This…