Hurley v. Coombe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hurley v. Coombe

239 A.D.2d 690, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4955

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

DecidedMay 8, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 690 (Hurley v. Coombe) 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

Hurley v. Coombe, 239 A.D.2d 690, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4955 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Hemmett, Jr., J.), entered August 5,1996 in Washington County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

While an inmate at Clinton Correctional Facility in Clinton County, petitioner was found guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules prohibiting inmates from engaging in extortion and making threats. He challenges this determination on the ground that he was denied the right to call a particular inmate as a witness at the hearing. Because the proffered testimony of this inmate was irrelevant to the issue of petitioner’s guilt or innocence of the charged offenses, petitioner’s request for this witness was properly denied (see, Matter of Dumpson v Mann, 225 AD2d 809, 811, lv denied 88 NY2d 805). Petitioner’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for review or without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Casey and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Hemmett, Jr., J.), entered August 5,1996 in Washington County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

While an inmate at Clinton Correctional Facility in Clinton County, petitioner was found guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules prohibiting inmates from engaging in extortion and making threats. He challenges this determination on the ground that he was denied the right to call a particular inmate as a witness at the hearing. Because the proffered testimony of this inmate was irrelevant to the issue of petitioner’s guilt or innocence of the charged offenses, petitioner’s request for this witness was properly denied (see, Matter of Dumpson v Mann, 225 AD2d 809, 811, lv denied 88 NY2d 805). Petitioner’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for review or without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Casey and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 A.D.2d 690, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurley-v-coombe-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack