Matter of Perkins v. Annucci

129 A.D.3d 1421, 10 N.Y.S.3d 908
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 25, 2015
Docket519908
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 129 A.D.3d 1421 (Matter of Perkins v. Annucci) 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
Matter of Perkins v. Annucci, 129 A.D.3d 1421, 10 N.Y.S.3d 908 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

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

A search of petitioner’s cell disclosed a correction officer’s “baseball style cap” that was hidden inside of a box of rice. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with possession of escape items, possession of contraband, property damage or loss and possession of employee property. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty as charged. The determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal with a modified penalty, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The detailed misbehavior report, coupled with the testimony of its author who conducted the cell search, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Nieves v Annucci, 123 AD3d 1368, 1368 [2014]; Matter of Matthews v Fischer, 109 AD3d 1038, 1038 [2013]). Petitioner’s denial of the charges presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Starling v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision, 123 AD3d 1195, 1196 [2014]; Matter of Grant v Rock, 122 AD3d 1225, 1226 [2014]). Significantly, a reasonable inference *1422 of possession arose by virtue of the fact that the item was found in an area within petitioner’s control (see Matter of Nieves v Annucci, 123 AD3d at 1368-1369; Matter of Aguirre v Fischer, 111 AD3d 1219, 1220 [2013]).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, 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

Related

Matter of Slater v. Annucci
163 N.Y.S.3d 308 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Matter of Wood v. Annucci
2018 NY Slip Op 582 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Mitchell v. Department of Corrections & Community Supervision
147 A.D.3d 1135 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Osborne v. Venettozzi
141 A.D.3d 990 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Shufelt v. Annucci
138 A.D.3d 1336 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Giano v. Prack
138 A.D.3d 1285 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Davis v. Annucci
137 A.D.3d 1437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
129 A.D.3d 1421, 10 N.Y.S.3d 908, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-perkins-v-annucci-nyappdiv-2015.