Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Farrow v. Prack

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT


December 4, 2008

IN THE MATTER OF CURTIS FARROW, PETITIONER,
v.
ALBERT PRACK, AS DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL HOUSING AND INMATE DISCIPLINARY PROGRAMS, RESPONDENT.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Calendar Date: October 27, 2008

Before: Cardona, P.J., Carpinello, Rose, Lahtinen and Stein, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, was charged in a misbehavior report with assaulting another inmate. At the conclusion of a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty as charged. That determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking annulment ensued.

We confirm. The determination of guilt is supported by substantial evidence in the form of the detailed misbehavior report, hearing testimony from the correction sergeant who authored the report, and confidential hearing testimony considered by the Hearing Officer in camera (see Matter of Morris v Goord, 50 AD3d 1327, 1327 [2008]). Although the Hearing Officer did not personally interview the confidential informants, he properly assessed their reliability by making sufficient inquiries of the correction sergeants who received the confidential information (see Matter of Catlin v Gouverneur Correctional Facility, 38 AD3d 1025, 1026 [2007]). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claims that the misbehavior report was defective and the penalty imposed was excessive, have been examined and found to be unavailing.

Cardona, P.J., Carpinello, Rose, Lahtinen and Stein, JJ., concur.

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

20081204

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.