Corona v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corona v. New York State Department of Correctional Services

2 A.D.3d 1118, 768 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1 A.D.2d 842, 767 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13541

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 18, 2003·Published·Cited by 7 cases

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 the Superintendent of Ulster Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit inmates from being out of place and refusing to obey a direct order. On administrative appeal, petitioner challenged only the harshness of the penalty imposed. Based on petitioner’s failure to raise any other issues at the administrative level, all the other issues raised in this CPLR article 78 proceeding have been waived and are not preserved for our review (see Matter of Maldonado v Racette, 175 AD2d 963 [1991]; Matter of Samuels v Kelly, 143 AD2d 506 [1988], lv denied 73 NY2d 707 [1989]). As petitioner’s penalty period has expired, that issue is moot.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Rose and Kane, 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 the Superintendent of Ulster Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit inmates from being out of place and refusing to obey a direct order. On administrative appeal, petitioner challenged only the harshness of the penalty imposed. Based on petitioner’s failure to raise any other issues at the administrative level, all the other issues raised in this CPLR article 78 proceeding have been waived and are not preserved for our review (see Matter of Maldonado v Racette, 175 AD2d 963 [1991]; Matter of Samuels v Kelly, 143 AD2d 506 [1988], lv denied 73 NY2d 707 [1989]). As petitioner’s penalty period has expired, that issue is moot.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Corona v. New York State Department of Correctional Services, 2 A.D.3d 1118, 768 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1 A.D.2d 842, 767 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13541 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

2 A.D.3d 1118 (Corona v. New York State Department of Correctional Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related