Muhammad v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Muhammad v. Coughlin

206 A.D.2d 565, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7230

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

DecidedJuly 7, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 206 A.D.2d 565 (Muhammad 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

Muhammad v. Coughlin, 206 A.D.2d 565, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7230 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review four determinations of respondent Commis[566]*566sioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

In this proceeding, petitioner challenges four separate and unrelated determinations of guilt. Initially, we note that one of the determinations has been administratively reversed; accordingly, the issues pertinent to that determination are not before this Court. With respect to the first determination of guilt, the record reveals that, contrary to petitioner’s claim, he was not denied the opportunity to present procedural objections. Petitioner’s remaining arguments regarding the final two determinations at issue, including his claims that insufficient inquiry into certain witnesses’ refusal to testify was made and that one of the dispositions was not timely rendered, have been examined and rejected as either not properly before this Court or as lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., White, Weiss, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determinations are 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 Washington County) to review four determinations of respondent Commis[566]*566sioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

In this proceeding, petitioner challenges four separate and unrelated determinations of guilt. Initially, we note that one of the determinations has been administratively reversed; accordingly, the issues pertinent to that determination are not before this Court. With respect to the first determination of guilt, the record reveals that, contrary to petitioner’s claim, he was not denied the opportunity to present procedural objections. Petitioner’s remaining arguments regarding the final two determinations at issue, including his claims that insufficient inquiry into certain witnesses’ refusal to testify was made and that one of the dispositions was not timely rendered, have been examined and rejected as either not properly before this Court or as lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., White, Weiss, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determinations are confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 565, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muhammad-v-coughlin-nyappdiv-1994.