Brooks v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brooks v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services

242 A.D.2d 807, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8665

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

DecidedSeptember 11, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 242 A.D.2d 807 (Brooks v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services) 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

Brooks v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services, 242 A.D.2d 807, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8665 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Canfield, J.), entered January 15, 1997 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules after a hearing pursuant to charges contained in five misbehavior reports. By failing to object to the procedure of combining the five misbehavior reports into one tier III hearing, petitioner waived any challenge thereto (see, Matter of Alstranner v Selsky, 238 AD2d 658). Contrary to petitioner’s assertions, the record clearly demonstrates that petitioner was aware that the misbehavior reports were being combined into a single hearing. We do find, however, that Supreme Court erred in awarding respondents $20 in motion costs given the fact that petitioner’s motion to proceed as a poor person had previously been granted (see, CPLR 1102 [d]; see also, Cross v Town of Harmony, 257 App Div 1029, affd 285 NY 656). Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and are without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, without costs, by reversing so much thereof as imposed motion costs against petitioner, and, as so modified, affirmed.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Canfield, J.), entered January 15, 1997 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules after a hearing pursuant to charges contained in five misbehavior reports. By failing to object to the procedure of combining the five misbehavior reports into one tier III hearing, petitioner waived any challenge thereto (see, Matter of Alstranner v Selsky, 238 AD2d 658). Contrary to petitioner’s assertions, the record clearly demonstrates that petitioner was aware that the misbehavior reports were being combined into a single hearing. We do find, however, that Supreme Court erred in awarding respondents $20 in motion costs given the fact that petitioner’s motion to proceed as a poor person had previously been granted (see, CPLR 1102 [d]; see also, Cross v Town of Harmony, 257 App Div 1029, affd 285 NY 656). Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and are without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, without costs, by reversing so much thereof as imposed motion costs against petitioner, and, as so modified, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

242 A.D.2d 807, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-state-of-new-york-department-of-correctional-services-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack