Howard v. Colon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Howard v. Colon

206 A.D.2d 583, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7200

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

DecidedJuly 7, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 206 A.D.2d 583 (Howard v. Colon) 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

Howard v. Colon, 206 A.D.2d 583, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7200 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

We have examined petitioner’s challenges relating to the propriety of the disciplinary proceeding brought against him and find them to be unpersuasive. Contrary to petitioner’s claim, the record indicates that the Hearing Officer was [584]*584properly designated in accordance with the appropriate regulation. Moreover, we find no support in the record for petitioner’s claim that the Hearing Officer was biased, nor do we find proof that the outcome of the hearing flowed from the alleged bias.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., 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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

We have examined petitioner’s challenges relating to the propriety of the disciplinary proceeding brought against him and find them to be unpersuasive. Contrary to petitioner’s claim, the record indicates that the Hearing Officer was [584]*584properly designated in accordance with the appropriate regulation. Moreover, we find no support in the record for petitioner’s claim that the Hearing Officer was biased, nor do we find proof that the outcome of the hearing flowed from the alleged bias.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 583, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-colon-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack