Lawrence v. Edwards

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lawrence v. Edwards

261 A.D.2d 404, 690 N.Y.S.2d 69

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

DecidedMay 3, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 404 (Lawrence v. Edwards) 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

Lawrence v. Edwards, 261 A.D.2d 404, 690 N.Y.S.2d 69 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Superintendent of the Otisville Correctional Facility dated February 29, 1997, which confirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer, made after a hearing, finding the petitioner guilty, inter alia, of refusing to follow a direct order, and imposed a penalty.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report provided substantial evidence to support the determination finding him guilty of refusing to follow.a direct order and making a false statement (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130). To the extent that the petitioner and the inmate witnesses disputed the statements of the correction officers in the misbehavior report, this presented an issue of credibility which was in the Hearing Officer’s discretion to resolve (see, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 617; Matter of Vargas v Strack, 220 AD2d 675).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Superintendent of the Otisville Correctional Facility dated February 29, 1997, which confirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer, made after a hearing, finding the petitioner guilty, inter alia, of refusing to follow a direct order, and imposed a penalty.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report provided substantial evidence to support the determination finding him guilty of refusing to follow.a direct order and making a false statement (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130). To the extent that the petitioner and the inmate witnesses disputed the statements of the correction officers in the misbehavior report, this presented an issue of credibility which was in the Hearing Officer’s discretion to resolve (see, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 617; Matter of Vargas v Strack, 220 AD2d 675).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 404, 690 N.Y.S.2d 69, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-v-edwards-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack