Bryant v. Haubert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bryant v. Haubert

216 A.D.2d 293, 627 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5907

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

DecidedJune 5, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 293 (Bryant v. Haubert) 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

Bryant v. Haubert, 216 A.D.2d 293, 627 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Leonard A. Portuondo, dated July 1, 1993, which confirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer dated June 24, 1993, finding that the petitioner had violated certain prison disciplinary rules and imposing a penalty.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the [294]*294proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

We find that the misbehavior report, coupled with the testimony of a Correction Officer who witnessed the incident, provided substantial evidence to support the determination (see generally, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Leonard A. Portuondo, dated July 1, 1993, which confirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer dated June 24, 1993, finding that the petitioner had violated certain prison disciplinary rules and imposing a penalty.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the [294]*294proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

We find that the misbehavior report, coupled with the testimony of a Correction Officer who witnessed the incident, provided substantial evidence to support the determination (see generally, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 293, 627 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bryant-v-haubert-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack