Thomas v. Selsky

274 A.D.2d 721, 711 N.Y.S.2d 793, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7817

This text of 274 A.D.2d 721 (Thomas 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
Thomas v. Selsky, 274 A.D.2d 721, 711 N.Y.S.2d 793, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7817 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Following a tier III hearing, petitioner, a prison inmate, was found guilty of the sale or exchange of narcotics after an ongoing investigation revealed that petitioner was responsible for selling controlled substances within the facility. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who authored the misbehavior report, as well as the confidential testimony offered by the informant, provide substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt (see, Matter of Rivera v Selsky, 272 AD2d 708; Matter of Knight v Goord, 267 AD2d 523, Lv denied 94 NY2d 760).

Notably, there is no requirement that the Hearing Officer personally interview the confidential informant in order to make an assessment as to reliability (see, Matter of Abdur-Raheem v Mann, 85 NY2d 113). Here, the Hearing Officer heard testimony from, the correction officer who was the recipient of confidential information which was detailed and cor[722]*722roborated by other evidence (see, Matter of Zambrana v Goord, 251 AD2d 837; Matter of Williams v Goord, 251 AD2d 740). Petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his claim that the misbehavior report was not specific enough, are either unpreserved for our review or found to be without merit.

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Carpinello, Graffeo and Lahtinen, 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

Related

MTR. OF ABDUR-RAHEEM v. Mann
647 N.E.2d 1266 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
Williams v. Goord
251 A.D.2d 740 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Zambrana v. Goord
251 A.D.2d 837 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Knight v. Goord
267 A.D.2d 523 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Rivera v. Selsky
272 A.D.2d 708 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
274 A.D.2d 721, 711 N.Y.S.2d 793, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-selsky-nyappdiv-2000.