Perez v. SelSky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Perez v. SelSky

234 A.D.2d 844, 651 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12613

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 844 (Perez v. SelSky) 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

Perez v. SelSky, 234 A.D.2d 844, 651 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12613 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

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 respondents which directed that petitioner be placed in administrative segregation.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge an administrative determination assigning him to the administrative segregation housing unit for an indefinite period of time. Petitioner contends that the determination was not based upon substantial evidence that he poses a threat to the safety and security of the facility (see, 7 NYCRR 301.4 [b]). We disagree.

Adduced in evidence at the administrative hearing was information provided by the Inspector General’s office, describing petitioner as a powerful figure, known throughout the correctional system as the leader of a well-organized Hispanic gang. Petitioner was also characterized as being capable of contacting inmates at various State correctional facilities and ordering them to assault inmates considered to be the gang’s enemies. The recent stabbing death of an inmate was directly attributed to petitioner. Also in evidence was petitioner’s lengthy record of prison disciplinary rule violations, showing that he has been the subject of 17 misbehavior reports, together [845]*845with petitioner’s own testimony in which he admitted that he solves conflicts "physically * * * 100% We conclude that the determination assigning petitioner to administrative segregation on the ground that he poses a threat to the safety and security of the facility was based upon substantial evidence (see, Matter of Blake v Mann, 145 AD2d 699, 701, affd 75 NY2d 742). We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Spain, 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 Chemung County) to review a determination of respondents which directed that petitioner be placed in administrative segregation.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge an administrative determination assigning him to the administrative segregation housing unit for an indefinite period of time. Petitioner contends that the determination was not based upon substantial evidence that he poses a threat to the safety and security of the facility (see, 7 NYCRR 301.4 [b]). We disagree.

Adduced in evidence at the administrative hearing was information provided by the Inspector General’s office, describing petitioner as a powerful figure, known throughout the correctional system as the leader of a well-organized Hispanic gang. Petitioner was also characterized as being capable of contacting inmates at various State correctional facilities and ordering them to assault inmates considered to be the gang’s enemies. The recent stabbing death of an inmate was directly attributed to petitioner. Also in evidence was petitioner’s lengthy record of prison disciplinary rule violations, showing that he has been the subject of 17 misbehavior reports, together [845]*845with petitioner’s own testimony in which he admitted that he solves conflicts "physically * * * 100% We conclude that the determination assigning petitioner to administrative segregation on the ground that he poses a threat to the safety and security of the facility was based upon substantial evidence (see, Matter of Blake v Mann, 145 AD2d 699, 701, affd 75 NY2d 742). We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 A.D.2d 844, 651 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-v-selsky-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack