Brown v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. Coughlin

169 A.D.2d 928, 564 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 133

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brown v. Coughlin. Read the opinion of the Court — 165 A.D.2d 935 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 10, 1991·Published

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 which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Although the misbehavior report was made by a correction officer who did not actually witness the assault, the report set forth the officer’s conversation with the victim and the victim’s identification of petitioner took place immediately after the assault. Under the circumstances, the report contained sufficient information of a relevant and probative nature to [929]*929support the determination of guilt (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 156 AD2d 806, affd 76 NY2d 964; Matter of Colon v Coughlin, 147 AD2d 802). Furthermore, any questions of credibility were for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Hernandez v LeFevre, 150 AD2d 954, lv denied 74 NY2d 615).

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Casey, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.

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 which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Although the misbehavior report was made by a correction officer who did not actually witness the assault, the report set forth the officer’s conversation with the victim and the victim’s identification of petitioner took place immediately after the assault. Under the circumstances, the report contained sufficient information of a relevant and probative nature to [929]*929support the determination of guilt (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 156 AD2d 806, affd 76 NY2d 964; Matter of Colon v Coughlin, 147 AD2d 802). Furthermore, any questions of credibility were for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Hernandez v LeFevre, 150 AD2d 954, lv denied 74 NY2d 615).

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Casey, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.

Brown v. Coughlin, 169 A.D.2d 928, 564 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

169 A.D.2d 928 (Brown v. Coughlin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related