Benjamin Rivera v. Keane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Benjamin Rivera v. Keane

225 A.D.2d 699, 639 N.Y.2d 467, 639 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2616

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

DecidedMarch 18, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 699 (Benjamin Rivera v. Keane) 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

Benjamin Rivera v. Keane, 225 A.D.2d 699, 639 N.Y.2d 467, 639 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2616 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report and the hearing evidence provided substantial evidence to support the determination finding him guilty of violent conduct, possession of a weapon, and damaging property (see, Matter of Bryant v Coughlin, 77 NY2d 642; Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964; Matter of Vogelsang v Coombe, 105 AD2d 913, affd 66 NY2d 835).

The petitioner contends that his due process rights were violated due to the absence from the misbehavior report of the signatures of other correction officers who witnessed the incident. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate any prejudice accruing to him as a result of this omission (see, Matter of Serra v Selsky, 223 AD2d 845; Matter of Smith v Walker, 209 AD2d 799; Matter of Del'Orfano v Coughlin, 209 AD2d 798; Matter of Smith v Coughlin, 170 AD2d 845).

[700]*700The petitioner’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Friedmann, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report and the hearing evidence provided substantial evidence to support the determination finding him guilty of violent conduct, possession of a weapon, and damaging property (see, Matter of Bryant v Coughlin, 77 NY2d 642; Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964; Matter of Vogelsang v Coombe, 105 AD2d 913, affd 66 NY2d 835).

The petitioner contends that his due process rights were violated due to the absence from the misbehavior report of the signatures of other correction officers who witnessed the incident. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate any prejudice accruing to him as a result of this omission (see, Matter of Serra v Selsky, 223 AD2d 845; Matter of Smith v Walker, 209 AD2d 799; Matter of Del'Orfano v Coughlin, 209 AD2d 798; Matter of Smith v Coughlin, 170 AD2d 845).

[700]*700The petitioner’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Friedmann, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 699, 639 N.Y.2d 467, 639 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benjamin-rivera-v-keane-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack