Moody v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Moody v. Coughlin

213 A.D.2d 955, 624 N.Y.S.2d 978, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3335

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 213 A.D.2d 955 (Moody 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

Moody v. Coughlin, 213 A.D.2d 955, 624 N.Y.S.2d 978, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3335 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

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 certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, raises various procedural challenges to his prison disciplinary hearing. Initially, we reject petitioner’s contention that he was denied a complete set of hearing transcripts. The record reveals that while part of the hearing transcript was omitted from the documentation originally provided to petitioner, this oversight was subsequently remedied. Moreover, inasmuch as the disciplinary charges at issue pertained to petitioner’s conduct toward two different correction officers, we reject petitioner’s claim that the charges were redundant. Lastly, based on our review of the record, we find that the Hearing Officer was unbiased, acted within his discretion in refusing to admit a certain videotape into evidence and took meaningful steps to secure the presence of petitioner’s witnesses.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., 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 certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, raises various procedural challenges to his prison disciplinary hearing. Initially, we reject petitioner’s contention that he was denied a complete set of hearing transcripts. The record reveals that while part of the hearing transcript was omitted from the documentation originally provided to petitioner, this oversight was subsequently remedied. Moreover, inasmuch as the disciplinary charges at issue pertained to petitioner’s conduct toward two different correction officers, we reject petitioner’s claim that the charges were redundant. Lastly, based on our review of the record, we find that the Hearing Officer was unbiased, acted within his discretion in refusing to admit a certain videotape into evidence and took meaningful steps to secure the presence of petitioner’s witnesses.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 A.D.2d 955, 624 N.Y.S.2d 978, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moody-v-coughlin-nyappdiv-1995.