Mena v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mena v. Goord

243 A.D.2d 566, 665 N.Y.S.2d 292, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9817

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

DecidedOctober 14, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 243 A.D.2d 566 (Mena v. Goord) 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

Mena v. Goord, 243 A.D.2d 566, 665 N.Y.S.2d 292, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9817 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, dated July 2, 1996, which affirmed a determination of a Hearing Officer dated April 23, 1996, after a Tier III Superintendent’s hearing finding the petitioner guilty of certain misconduct and imposing penalties.

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

The testimony of the charging officer, as well as the written misbehavior report, constituted substantial evidence of the petitioner’s misconduct (Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615; Matter of Duso v Kralik, 216 AD2d 297).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and McGinity, 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 Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, dated July 2, 1996, which affirmed a determination of a Hearing Officer dated April 23, 1996, after a Tier III Superintendent’s hearing finding the petitioner guilty of certain misconduct and imposing penalties.

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

The testimony of the charging officer, as well as the written misbehavior report, constituted substantial evidence of the petitioner’s misconduct (Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615; Matter of Duso v Kralik, 216 AD2d 297).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 566, 665 N.Y.S.2d 292, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mena-v-goord-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack