Patterson v. Senkowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Patterson v. Senkowski

203 A.D.2d 840, 611 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4432

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

DecidedApril 28, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 203 A.D.2d 840 (Patterson v. Senkowski) 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

Patterson v. Senkowski, 203 A.D.2d 840, 611 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4432 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered July 13, 1993 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner claims that it was inconsistent for him to have been found guilty of possessing a weapon but not guilty of possessing an altered item. The altered item was also the weapon that petitioner was charged with possessing. There is, however, no conflict. Petitioner had pleaded guilty to the weapons charge and not guilty to the altered item charge. Once petitioner pleaded guilty to the weapons charge, the Hearing Officer apparently saw no reason to proceed further on the second charge. As respondents note, petitioner was certainly not harmed by the Hearing Officer’s declining to proceed on the possibly duplicative altered item charge. Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been examined and rejected as lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered July 13, 1993 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner claims that it was inconsistent for him to have been found guilty of possessing a weapon but not guilty of possessing an altered item. The altered item was also the weapon that petitioner was charged with possessing. There is, however, no conflict. Petitioner had pleaded guilty to the weapons charge and not guilty to the altered item charge. Once petitioner pleaded guilty to the weapons charge, the Hearing Officer apparently saw no reason to proceed further on the second charge. As respondents note, petitioner was certainly not harmed by the Hearing Officer’s declining to proceed on the possibly duplicative altered item charge. Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been examined and rejected as lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 840, 611 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-senkowski-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack