Crosby v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Crosby v. Selsky

284 A.D.2d 702, 726 N.Y.S.2d 305, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6233

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

DecidedJune 14, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 284 A.D.2d 702 (Crosby v. Selsky) 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

Crosby v. Selsky, 284 A.D.2d 702, 726 N.Y.S.2d 305, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6233 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court,, entered in Franklin County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit assault on a staff member and refusing to obey a direct order. We find that the detailed misbehavior report, the testimony of the correction officer who was the victim of petitioner’s assault and the testimony given by the additional correction officers who subdued petitioner constitute substantial evidence to support this determination (see, Matter of Pica v Selsky, 274 AD2d 712, 713; Matter of Harris v Corcoran, 261 AD2d 740). Petitioner’s conflicting account of the incident raised a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Arias v Goord, 274 AD2d 807). We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his allegations of Hearing Officer bias, and find them to be without merit.

Crew III, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, 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 Franklin County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit assault on a staff member and refusing to obey a direct order. We find that the detailed misbehavior report, the testimony of the correction officer who was the victim of petitioner’s assault and the testimony given by the additional correction officers who subdued petitioner constitute substantial evidence to support this determination (see, Matter of Pica v Selsky, 274 AD2d 712, 713; Matter of Harris v Corcoran, 261 AD2d 740). Petitioner’s conflicting account of the incident raised a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Arias v Goord, 274 AD2d 807). We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his allegations of Hearing Officer bias, and find them to be without merit.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 702, 726 N.Y.S.2d 305, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crosby-v-selsky-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack