Andino v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Andino v. Goord

247 A.D.2d 919, 668 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1270

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 4, 1998·Published

Opinion

Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Evidence adduced at petitioner’s Tier III disciplinary hearing, including the written misbehavior report and testimony from two physicians, constitutes substantial evidence to support the determination (see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139). Petitioner offered no evidence to support his bald assertion that he was unable to comply with the order directing him to provide a urine sample (see, Matter of Pabon v LeFevre, 124 AD2d 310). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.)

Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

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

Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Evidence adduced at petitioner’s Tier III disciplinary hearing, including the written misbehavior report and testimony from two physicians, constitutes substantial evidence to support the determination (see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139). Petitioner offered no evidence to support his bald assertion that he was unable to comply with the order directing him to provide a urine sample (see, Matter of Pabon v LeFevre, 124 AD2d 310). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.)

Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Andino v. Goord, 247 A.D.2d 919, 668 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1270 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

247 A.D.2d 919 (Andino v. Goord) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related