Griffin v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Griffin v. Goord

266 A.D.2d 830, 698 N.Y.S.2d 365, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11902

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 830 (Griffin 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

Griffin v. Goord, 266 A.D.2d 830, 698 N.Y.S.2d 365, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner was found guilty following a Tier III hearing of violating various inmate rules. The determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139), and any discrepancy between the misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who authored the misbehavior report raised a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, e.g., Matter of Hooper v Goord, 248 AD2d 987). Petitioner further contends that the Hearing Officer did not act in a fair and impartial manner. That contention was not raised on administrative appeal, and thus petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to it (see, Matter of Nelson v Coughlin, 188 AD2d 1071, appeal dismissed 81 NY2d 834). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.) Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Balio, JJ.

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

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner was found guilty following a Tier III hearing of violating various inmate rules. The determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139), and any discrepancy between the misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who authored the misbehavior report raised a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, e.g., Matter of Hooper v Goord, 248 AD2d 987). Petitioner further contends that the Hearing Officer did not act in a fair and impartial manner. That contention was not raised on administrative appeal, and thus petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to it (see, Matter of Nelson v Coughlin, 188 AD2d 1071, appeal dismissed 81 NY2d 834). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.) Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 830, 698 N.Y.S.2d 365, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-goord-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack