Porter v. Goord

21 A.D.3d 1199, 800 N.Y.S.2d 856
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Porter v. Goord. Read the opinion of the Court — 6 A.D.3d 1013

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 respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of lewd exposure, harassment, interference with a prison employee and refusing a direct order in violation of the prison disciplinary rules. That determination was upheld on administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

Contrary to petitioner’s contentions, the detailed misbehavior report and the testimony of its author, together with the log book entry and the videotape of the assistant’s visit, provide substantial evidence of his guilt (see Matter of Green v Goord, 284 AD2d 677 [2001]; Matter of Smith v Goord, 275 AD2d 827 [1200]*1200[2000]). To the extent that they were preserved, petitioner’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Mugglin and Kane, 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

Porter v. Goord, 21 A.D.3d 1199, 800 N.Y.S.2d 856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

21 A.D.3d 1199 (Porter v. Goord) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. Goord
275 A.D.2d 827 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Green v. Goord
284 A.D.2d 677 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)