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.

Singleton v. Dubray

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT


April 23, 2009

IN THE MATTER OF THOMAS SINGLETON, PETITIONER,
v.
KEITH DUBRAY, AS DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL HOUSING AND INMATE DISCIPLINARY PROGRAMS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

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: March 2, 2009

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose, Malone Jr. and McCarthy, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

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

Petitioner, an inmate, was charged in two separate misbehavior reports with violating various prison disciplinary rules. In connection with the first report, petitioner pleaded guilty with an explanation to possessing outdated medication. With respect to the second report, petitioner pleaded guilty to violating urinalysis testing procedures and refusing a direct order. Following administrative appeal, this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. Given that petitioner pleaded guilty to the charges against him, he is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Wilson v Dubray, 54 AD3d 1089, 1090 [2008]). Furthermore, petitioner's claim that his institutional record contains inaccurate information is not properly before us inasmuch as he has not exhausted his administrative remedies (see 7 NYCRR part 5; Matter of Barclay v Summers, ___ AD3d ___, ___, 2009 Slip Op 01749, *1 [2009]; Matter of Rivera v Joy, 50 AD3d 1333, 1334 [2008]; Matter of Pickett v Long, 299 AD2d 802, 803 [1996]). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been examined and, to the extent preserved, are unavailing.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose, Malone Jr. and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

20090423

© 1992-2009 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.