Dickerson v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dickerson v. Goord

254 A.D.2d 645, 679 N.Y.S.2d 725, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11514

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 645 (Dickerson v. Goord) 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

Dickerson v. Goord, 254 A.D.2d 645, 679 N.Y.S.2d 725, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

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.

Petitioner, an inmate, was found guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules after he was observed fighting with another inmate. Initially, inasmuch as one of the determinations has been administratively reversed and expunged from petitioner’s record, we find that petitioner’s challenge to this determination is moot (see, Matter of Martin v Henderson, 159 AD2d 867). As to the remaining determinations, the evidence adduced at petitioner’s disciplinary hearing, including the detailed misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who witnessed the altercation, provides substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt (see, Matter of Contrera v Coombe, 236 AD2d 661). Finally, petitioner’s various procedural challenges are either unpreserved for our review or are otherwise lacking in merit.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Graffeo, 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 respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, an inmate, was found guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules after he was observed fighting with another inmate. Initially, inasmuch as one of the determinations has been administratively reversed and expunged from petitioner’s record, we find that petitioner’s challenge to this determination is moot (see, Matter of Martin v Henderson, 159 AD2d 867). As to the remaining determinations, the evidence adduced at petitioner’s disciplinary hearing, including the detailed misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who witnessed the altercation, provides substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt (see, Matter of Contrera v Coombe, 236 AD2d 661). Finally, petitioner’s various procedural challenges are either unpreserved for our review or are otherwise lacking in merit.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 645, 679 N.Y.S.2d 725, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dickerson-v-goord-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack