Rosales v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosales v. Goord

265 A.D.2d 713, 697 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10717

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

DecidedOctober 21, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 265 A.D.2d 713 (Rosales v. Goord) 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

Rosales v. Goord, 265 A.D.2d 713, 697 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10717 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Chemung County) to reyiew a determination of respondent which directed that petitioner be placed in administrative segregation.

Substantial evidence supports the determination that petitioner, a prison inmate, posed a threat to the order and security of the facility sufficient to require his placement in administrative segregation (see, 7 NYCRR 301.4 [b]; Matter of Torres v Doling, 257 AD2d 928). Testimony presented at the hearing, together with confidential testimony, identified petitioner as the one who assaulted two inmates with a razor [714]*714blade and established that he was known to carry out similar attacks on behalf of a fellow gang member. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, a review of the in camera material demonstrates that the Hearing Officer independently assessed the reliability of the confidential material (see, Matter of Torres v Doling, supra; Matter of Roe v Selsky, 250 AD2d 935). To the extent that petitioner’s remaining contentions are preserved for our review, we find them to be unpersuasive.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Graffeo and Mugglin, 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 reyiew a determination of respondent which directed that petitioner be placed in administrative segregation.

Substantial evidence supports the determination that petitioner, a prison inmate, posed a threat to the order and security of the facility sufficient to require his placement in administrative segregation (see, 7 NYCRR 301.4 [b]; Matter of Torres v Doling, 257 AD2d 928). Testimony presented at the hearing, together with confidential testimony, identified petitioner as the one who assaulted two inmates with a razor [714]*714blade and established that he was known to carry out similar attacks on behalf of a fellow gang member. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, a review of the in camera material demonstrates that the Hearing Officer independently assessed the reliability of the confidential material (see, Matter of Torres v Doling, supra; Matter of Roe v Selsky, 250 AD2d 935). To the extent that petitioner’s remaining contentions are preserved for our review, we find them to be unpersuasive.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 713, 697 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosales-v-goord-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack