Israel v. Leonardo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Israel v. Leonardo

201 A.D.2d 822, 607 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1171

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 10, 1994·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondents which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

The written misbehavior report in this case by itself constitutes substantial evidence to support the finding of guilt. It described, with specificity, the incident in which the author was personally involved and the prison disciplinary rules allegedly violated. The report is dated the same day as the incident, signed by its author and endorsed by another correction officer. Petitioner’s claims of innocence raised questions of credibility which the Hearing Officer resolved against him. Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as either unpreserved for review or lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, White and Weiss, 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 Washington County) to review a determination of respondents which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

The written misbehavior report in this case by itself constitutes substantial evidence to support the finding of guilt. It described, with specificity, the incident in which the author was personally involved and the prison disciplinary rules allegedly violated. The report is dated the same day as the incident, signed by its author and endorsed by another correction officer. Petitioner’s claims of innocence raised questions of credibility which the Hearing Officer resolved against him. Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as either unpreserved for review or lacking in merit.

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

Israel v. Leonardo, 201 A.D.2d 822, 607 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1171 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

201 A.D.2d 822 (Israel v. Leonardo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related