Al-Matin v. Artus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Al-Matin v. Artus

43 A.D.3d 497, 840 N.Y.S.2d 235

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 2, 2007·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

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

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of possession of a weapon, a violation of prison disciplinary rules. We confirm. The misbehavior report with a specific account of the incident and testimony by the correction officer who searched petitioner’s cell and discovered the weapon, a shank, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966 [1990]; Matter of Binns v Goord, 12 AD3d 1006, 1007 [2004]). Petitioner’s exculpatory statements presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Miller v New York [498] State Dept, of Correctional Servs., 295 AD2d 714, 714-715 [2002]). Contrary to petitioner’s suggestion, the record demonstrates that the hearing was conducted in a fair and impartial manner and the determination did not flow from any bias on the part of the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Cayenne v Goord, 16 AD3d 782, 783-784 [2005]).

Crew III, J.E, Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of possession of a weapon, a violation of prison disciplinary rules. We confirm. The misbehavior report with a specific account of the incident and testimony by the correction officer who searched petitioner’s cell and discovered the weapon, a shank, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966 [1990]; Matter of Binns v Goord, 12 AD3d 1006, 1007 [2004]). Petitioner’s exculpatory statements presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Miller v New York [498] State Dept, of Correctional Servs., 295 AD2d 714, 714-715 [2002]). Contrary to petitioner’s suggestion, the record demonstrates that the hearing was conducted in a fair and impartial manner and the determination did not flow from any bias on the part of the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Cayenne v Goord, 16 AD3d 782, 783-784 [2005]).

Crew III, J.E, Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Al-Matin v. Artus, 43 A.D.3d 497, 840 N.Y.S.2d 235 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

43 A.D.3d 497 (Al-Matin v. Artus) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related