From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spirles v. Wilcox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 27, 2003
302 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

92060

Decided and Entered: February 27, 2003.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Superintendent of Southport Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Michael Spirles, Pine City, petitioner pro se.

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

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Lahtinen and, Kane, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with refusing a direct order and a movement violation after he refused a correction officer's order to pack his property. Following a disciplinary hearing at which petitioner was not present, petitioner was found guilty of both charges. Petitioner appeals, contending that he did not waive his right to be present at the hearing. Although petitioner explained on a waiver of attendance form that he was unable to attend the hearing due to back problems which prevented him from walking, the correction officer who was to escort petitioner to the hearing testified that petitioner was able to walk to the cell gate and fill out the form without difficulty. Furthermore, the facility nurse testified that petitioner, who had no history of significant back problems, did not appear to be in distress that morning when he received his medication and there had been no emergency sick call that day regarding back problems. Finally, the waiver form, signed by petitioner, gave him notice that the hearing would proceed in his absence. In light of the foregoing, we find no reason to disturb the Hearing Officer's determination that petitioner waived his right to be present at the hearing (see Matter of Lebron v. Goord, 288 A.D.2d 583, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 608; Matter of Ward v. Goord, 249 A.D.2d 711, 712).

Although the proceeding was properly transferred to this Court since the petition arguably raised an issue of substantial evidence, petitioner has not raised a substantial evidence issue in his brief and we deem the issue abandoned (see Matter of Johnson v. Goord, 260 A.D.2d 816).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Spirles v. Wilcox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 27, 2003
302 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Spirles v. Wilcox

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MICHAEL SPIRLES, Petitioner, v. W.E. WILCOX, as Captain…

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

Date published: Feb 27, 2003

Citations

302 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
754 N.Y.S.2d 602

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Rush v. Goord

This appeal by respondent ensued. The case law makes clear that an inmate has a fundamental right to be…

In the Matter of Davis v. Goord

This nurse testified that he examined petitioner on the morning of the hearings and found him fit.…