Martin v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martin v. Coughlin

173 A.D.2d 1039, 570 N.Y.S.2d 373, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7195

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

DecidedMay 16, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 173 A.D.2d 1039 (Martin 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

Martin v. Coughlin, 173 A.D.2d 1039, 570 N.Y.S.2d 373, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7195 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

In this proceeding, petitioner challenges the determination finding him guilty of possessing and distributing drugs primarily on the ground that the Hearing Officer failed to make his own assessment of the confidential informants’ credibility. However, the Hearing Officer personally interviewed one of the informants and the record establishes that this informant’s testimony was sufficiently detailed to allow the Hear[1040]*1040ing Officer to assess his credibility and to form a basis for the finding of guilt (see, Matter of McClean v LeFevre, 142 AD2d 911; Matter of Harris v Coughlin, 116 AD2d 896, lv denied 67 NY2d 610, 1047). Furthermore, while the misbehavior report did not set forth the precise time and date of petitioner’s drug transactions, it was more than adequate to inform petitioner of the specific charge against him to enable him to prepare a defense (see, Matter of Vogelsang v Coombe, 105 AD2d 913, affd 66 NY2d 835). As we have previously noted, greater detail may not always be possible if it is necessary to keep the information confidential to protect security interests (see, Matter of Bryant v Mann, 160 AD2d 1086, lv denied 76 NY2d 706). Here, any more detail could have disclosed the identity of the informant. Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be lacking in merit.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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 Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

In this proceeding, petitioner challenges the determination finding him guilty of possessing and distributing drugs primarily on the ground that the Hearing Officer failed to make his own assessment of the confidential informants’ credibility. However, the Hearing Officer personally interviewed one of the informants and the record establishes that this informant’s testimony was sufficiently detailed to allow the Hear[1040]*1040ing Officer to assess his credibility and to form a basis for the finding of guilt (see, Matter of McClean v LeFevre, 142 AD2d 911; Matter of Harris v Coughlin, 116 AD2d 896, lv denied 67 NY2d 610, 1047). Furthermore, while the misbehavior report did not set forth the precise time and date of petitioner’s drug transactions, it was more than adequate to inform petitioner of the specific charge against him to enable him to prepare a defense (see, Matter of Vogelsang v Coombe, 105 AD2d 913, affd 66 NY2d 835). As we have previously noted, greater detail may not always be possible if it is necessary to keep the information confidential to protect security interests (see, Matter of Bryant v Mann, 160 AD2d 1086, lv denied 76 NY2d 706). Here, any more detail could have disclosed the identity of the informant. Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be lacking in merit.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 A.D.2d 1039, 570 N.Y.S.2d 373, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-coughlin-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack