Nylander v. Prack, 519027

• Decision Date: 18 December 2014
• Docket Number: 519027
• Citation: 123 A.D.3d 1336,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 08896,996 N.Y.S.2d 802
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: In the Matter of Samson NYLANDER, Petitioner, v. Albert PRACK, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, et al., Respondents.

123 A.D.3d 1336
996 N.Y.S.2d 802
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 08896

In the Matter of Samson NYLANDER, Petitioner
v.
Albert PRACK, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, et al., Respondents.

519027

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Dec. 18, 2014.

996 N.Y.S.2d 803

Samson Nylander, Auburn, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondents.

Before: PETERS, P.J., LAHTINEN, GARRY, LYNCH and CLARK, JJ.

Opinion

123 A.D.3d 1336

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 which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

During a search of petitioner's cell, a correction officer found two altered hot plates, three books of matches, one frying pan and an envelope containing a written list of various ingredients used to make crystal methamphetamine. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with possessing drugs or drug paraphernalia and altering personal property. At the tier III disciplinary hearing, he admitted to possessing the items in question and was found guilty of the charges. The determination was subsequently affirmed on administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

Initially, the misbehavior report, testimony of its author and admissions of petitioner provide substantial evidence supporting that part of the determination finding petitioner guilty of altering personal property (see generally Matter of Whitt v. Goord, 259 A.D.2d 1045, 1045, 688 N.Y.S.2d 349 [1999] ). We reach a different conclusion, however, with respect to that part of the determination finding him guilty of possessing drugs or drug paraphernalia (see 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B][14][xv] ). Significantly, no drugs were found in...