Lopez v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lopez v. Coughlin

195 A.D.2d 1078, 601 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7922

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

DecidedJuly 16, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 195 A.D.2d 1078 (Lopez v. Coughlin) 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

Lopez v. Coughlin, 195 A.D.2d 1078, 601 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7922 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Petitioner [1079]*1079contends that the Hearing Officer abused his discretion in failing to provide petitioner with two requested witnesses. Six inmates testified on petitioner’s behalf at the hearing and each inmate testified consistent with petitioner’s version of events. We conclude that the Hearing Officer did not abuse his discretion in concluding that the testimony of the seventh inmate witness would be redundant. Petitioner has not shown that the eighth witness would have offered additional material testimony (see, Matter of Shamsid-Deen v Selsky, 195 AD2d 1084 [decided herewith]; Matter of Herrera v Coughlin, 171 AD2d 1081). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.—Article 78.) Present—Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Petitioner [1079]*1079contends that the Hearing Officer abused his discretion in failing to provide petitioner with two requested witnesses. Six inmates testified on petitioner’s behalf at the hearing and each inmate testified consistent with petitioner’s version of events. We conclude that the Hearing Officer did not abuse his discretion in concluding that the testimony of the seventh inmate witness would be redundant. Petitioner has not shown that the eighth witness would have offered additional material testimony (see, Matter of Shamsid-Deen v Selsky, 195 AD2d 1084 [decided herewith]; Matter of Herrera v Coughlin, 171 AD2d 1081). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.—Article 78.) Present—Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 A.D.2d 1078, 601 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopez-v-coughlin-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack