Hoskins v. Fischer

49 A.D.3d 1009, 853 N.Y.2d 422
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 13, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 1009 (Hoskins v. Fischer) 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
Hoskins v. Fischer, 49 A.D.3d 1009, 853 N.Y.2d 422 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Having attempted to pass a cigarette pack containing seven Biaxin pills into another inmate’s prison cell, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with possession/exchange of unauthorized medication and unauthorized exchange of personal property. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of both charges. That determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding followed.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who authored it, and the hearing testimony from a nurse confirming that petitioner did not have a prescription for the medication in question comprise substantial evidence in support of the determination [1010]*1010of guilt (see Matter of McKinley v Goord, 40 AD3d 1280, 1280 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 807 [2007]; Matter of Matthews v Goord, 275 AD2d 841, 841 [2000]). Conflicting testimony offered by petitioner created a credibility issue for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Morillo v Goord, 38 AD3d 947, 947-948 [2007]).

We reject petitioner’s claim that he was denied the right to attend part of the hearing. The record contains substantial evidence supporting the Hearing Officer’s determination that petitioner refused to attend, thereby waiving his right to be present (see Matter of Davis v Goord, 20 AD3d 706, 707-708 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 715 [2005]).

Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been examined and are unavailing.

Cardona, P.J., Spain, Carpinello, Kane and Kavanagh, 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

Related

MatterofRiveravCommissionerofDOCS
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
MatterofOrtegavAnnucci
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
Ortega v. Annucci
122 A.D.3d 1051 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Rivera v. Commissioner of DOCS
122 A.D.3d 1052 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Pine v. Fischer
118 A.D.3d 1196 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 A.D.3d 1009, 853 N.Y.2d 422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoskins-v-fischer-nyappdiv-2008.