Beckford v. Coombe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Beckford v. Coombe

233 A.D.2d 734, 650 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12060

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 21, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 233 A.D.2d 734 (Beckford v. Coombe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beckford v. Coombe, 233 A.D.2d 734, 650 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12060 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting inmates from using narcotics and controlled substances after his urine tested positive for the presence of marihuana. Petitioner was sentenced to one year in the special housing unit and loss of privileges. Although he admitted his guilt at the disciplinary hearing, petitioner contends that the determination must be annulled because of an off-the-record conversation that he allegedly overheard between the Hearing Officer and a correction officer regarding an appropriate penalty. There is, however, no evidence beyond petitioner’s assertions that such a conversation took place and, even if it did, there is no indication that petitioner was prejudiced as a result thereof (see, Matter of Cowart v Coughlin, 193 AD2d 887, 888). The record discloses that this was petitioner’s fifth alcohol or drug-related offense, rendering the penalty appropriate (see, Matter of Rodriguez v Coughlin, 216 AD2d 617). We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Casey and Spain, 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 Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting inmates from using narcotics and controlled substances after his urine tested positive for the presence of marihuana. Petitioner was sentenced to one year in the special housing unit and loss of privileges. Although he admitted his guilt at the disciplinary hearing, petitioner contends that the determination must be annulled because of an off-the-record conversation that he allegedly overheard between the Hearing Officer and a correction officer regarding an appropriate penalty. There is, however, no evidence beyond petitioner’s assertions that such a conversation took place and, even if it did, there is no indication that petitioner was prejudiced as a result thereof (see, Matter of Cowart v Coughlin, 193 AD2d 887, 888). The record discloses that this was petitioner’s fifth alcohol or drug-related offense, rendering the penalty appropriate (see, Matter of Rodriguez v Coughlin, 216 AD2d 617). We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Casey and Spain, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 734, 650 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beckford-v-coombe-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack