Heath v. Walker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heath v. Walker

255 A.D.2d 1006, 681 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12313

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D.2d 1006 (Heath v. Walker) 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

Heath v. Walker, 255 A.D.2d 1006, 681 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12313 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner was found guilty after a Tier III hearing of violating inmate rules 100.13 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [1] [iv] [fighting]) and 106.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [7] [i] [failing to obey promptly an order of a correction officer]). The misbehavior report, together with the author’s testimony, constitutes substantial evidence supporting the determination (see, Matter of Green v Williams, 252 AD2d 974; Matter of Rivers v Williams, 252 AD2d 986). The testimony of petitioner and the inmate witness called by him to testify merely raised an issue of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm, 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 after a Tier III hearing of violating inmate rules 100.13 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [1] [iv] [fighting]) and 106.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [7] [i] [failing to obey promptly an order of a correction officer]). The misbehavior report, together with the author’s testimony, constitutes substantial evidence supporting the determination (see, Matter of Green v Williams, 252 AD2d 974; Matter of Rivers v Williams, 252 AD2d 986). The testimony of petitioner and the inmate witness called by him to testify merely raised an issue of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 1006, 681 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heath-v-walker-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack