Boyd v. Prack
| Decision Date | 11 February 2016 |
| Docket Number | 520617. |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Claim of Ulysses BOYD, Petitioner, v. Albert J. PRACK, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
136 A.D.3d 1136
24 N.Y.S.3d 457
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 01026
In the Matter of the Claim of Ulysses BOYD, Petitioner,
v.
Albert J. PRACK, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, et al., Respondents.
520617.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Feb. 11, 2016.
Ulysses Boyd, Stormville, petitioner pro se.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondents.
GARRY, J.
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 Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
During a search of petitioner's cell, a correction officer found a cardboard box that had been fashioned into a cooler and an oil-soaked tissue that had been placed on the bulb of a lamp. While the officer was removing these items from the cell, petitioner suddenly lunged toward the officer but was subdued when another officer arrived to provide assistance. As a result, petitioner was charged with attempting to assault staff, interfering with an employee, possessing an altered item, possessing flammable materials, engaging in violent conduct and creating a disturbance. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of the charges and the determination was later affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. The misbehavior report, documentary evidence and the hearing testimony provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Wilson v. Annucci, 129 A.D.3d 1422, 1422, 10 N.Y.S.3d 908 2015; Matter of Douglas v. Fischer, 126 A.D.3d 1244, 1245, 3 N.Y.S.3d 654 2015, lv. denied 26 N.Y.3d 904, 2015 WL 5254842 2015 ). The contrary testimony of petitioner and his inmate witnesses presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Adams v. Fischer, 116 A.D.3d 1269, 1270, 983 N.Y.S.2d 746 2014; Matter of Espinal v. Fischer, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miazga v. Assaf
...issue of fact with respect to defendants' billing practices. Thus, summary judgment was properly denied on this one cause of action.136 A.D.3d 1136Plaintiff's remaining contentions, to the extent that they are properly before us, have been considered and found to be without merit.ORDERED th......
-
Partak v. Venettozzi
...review (see 7 NYCRR 254.6 [a][2]; Matter of Liggan v. Annucci, 171 A.D.3d 1325, 1326, 97 N.Y.S.3d 805 [2019] ; Matter of Boyd v. Prack, 136 A.D.3d 1136, 1137, 24 N.Y.S.3d 457 [2016] ). Lastly, the record does not disclose that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed ......
-
Fernandez v. Annucci
...issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Davis v. Annucci, 137 A.D.3d at 1438, 27 N.Y.S.3d 291; Matter of Boyd v. Prack, 136 A.D.3d 1136, 1136, 24 N.Y.S.3d 457 [2016] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report was sufficiently specific and provided adequat......
-
Young v. Prack
...while the incident was ongoing (see Matter of Hyatt v. Annucci, 141 A.D.3d 977, 978, 34 N.Y.S.3d 915 [2016] ; Matter of Boyd v. Prack, 136 A.D.3d 1136, 1136, 24 N.Y.S.3d 457 [2016] ; Matter of Blocker v. Fischer, 107 A.D.3d 1285, 1286, 967 N.Y.S.2d 525 [2013] ). Petitioner's contention that......