Mata v. Coombe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mata v. Coombe

249 A.D.2d 670, 671 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3869

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

DecidedApril 9, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 670 (Mata 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

Mata v. Coombe, 249 A.D.2d 670, 671 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the administrative determination that found him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits inmates from refusing to follow a direct order. Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the determination of petitioner’s guilt. The correction officer who authored the misbehavior report testified that after ascertaining that a loud voice was coming from petitioner’s cell, he ordered petitioner to quiet down whereupon petitioner refused and became argumentative. Petitioner’s contrary testimony merely created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Flowers v Barkley, 244 AD2d 682, 683). We find petitioner’s remaining contentions to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Carpinello, 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 Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the administrative determination that found him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits inmates from refusing to follow a direct order. Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the determination of petitioner’s guilt. The correction officer who authored the misbehavior report testified that after ascertaining that a loud voice was coming from petitioner’s cell, he ordered petitioner to quiet down whereupon petitioner refused and became argumentative. Petitioner’s contrary testimony merely created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of Flowers v Barkley, 244 AD2d 682, 683). We find petitioner’s remaining contentions to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 670, 671 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mata-v-coombe-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack