From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wigfall v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 24, 2008
53 A.D.3d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 503124.

July 24, 2008.

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 respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Joseph Wigfall, West Coxsackie, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Carpinello, Kane, Kavanagh and Stein, JJ., concur.


Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of refusing a direct order, making threats, harassing facility staff and creating a disturbance. Upon administrative appeal, that determination was affirmed with a modified penalty of 90 days in the special housing unit and a corresponding loss of privileges, along with 60 days of recommended loss of good time. This CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking annulment ensued.

We confirm. Substantial evidence consisting of the misbehavior report and testimony adduced at the hearing support the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Rodriguez v. Selsky, 50 AD3d 1337, 1337). Any conflicts that could be construed in the hearing testimony presented credibility issues for resolution by the Hearing Officer ( see Matter of Chaney v Selsky, 37 AD3d 983, 984), as did petitioner's assertion that the misbehavior report was fabricated in an effort to harass him ( see Matter of Williams v Selsky, 50 AD3d 1426, 1427). The lapses in the hearing transcript were "not so significant as to preclude meaningful review by this Court" ( Matter of Butler v. Selsky, 49 AD3d 1122, 1123). As for petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim that he was denied documentary evidence, we have examined them and find no reason to disturb the determination.

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


Summaries of

Wigfall v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 24, 2008
53 A.D.3d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Wigfall v. Goord

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jul 24, 2008

Citations

53 A.D.3d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 6400
861 N.Y.S.2d 528

Citing Cases

Williams v. Walsh

That determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking…

Rivera v. Fischer

As an initial matter, we note that, contrary to petitioner's assertion, Supreme Court properly transferred…