Perron v. Coughlin
| Decision Date | 30 December 1993 |
| Citation | 606 N.Y.S.2d 67,199 A.D.2d 903 |
| Parties | In the Matter of James PERRON, Petitioner, v. Thomas A. COUGHLIN III, as Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
James Perron, in pro per.
Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen. (Patrick Barnett-Mulligan, of counsel), Albany, for respondents.
Before WEISS, P.J., and CREW, CARDONA, WHITE and CASEY, JJ.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 () to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner, an inmate in the State prison system, contends that the determination finding him guilty of attempting to escape, possession of escape items and possession of contraband is not supported by substantial evidence. The latter two infractions are based upon a compass which was found in petitioner's cubicle and are clearly supported by the record. The escape infraction is premised in part upon confidential information and petitioner claims that the Hearing Officer failed to make the requisite findings regarding the credibility and reliability of the confidential information. An examination of the confidential testimony submitted to us for an in camera review establishes the necessary detailed, specific and corroborative evidence to permit the Hearing Officer to make an independent assessment of the confidential informant's credibility and the reliability of the information (see, Matter of Lopez v. Lacy, 184 A.D.2d 819, 584 N.Y.S.2d 340), and review of the Hearing Officer's decision reveals that he made such an assessment. In these circumstances, it was not necessary for the Hearing Officer to interview the informant (see, Matter of Harris v. Coughlin, 116 A.D.2d 896, 498 N.Y.S.2d 276, lv. denied 67 N.Y.2d 610, 1047, 504 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1023, 495 N.E.2d 355, 356). The record also contains the necessary basis for the Hearing Officer's refusal to disclose the confidential evidence to petitioner (see, Matter of Feneque v. Selsky, 188 A.D.2d 819, 591 N.Y.S.2d 814). We also find no merit in petitioner's claim that the misbehavior report provided insufficient notice of the alleged misconduct.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Abdur-Raheem v. Mann
...authority's determination but must instead make his or her own evaluation of the informant's credibility (e.g., Matter of Perron v. Coughlin, 199 A.D.2d 903, 606 N.Y.S.2d 67; Matter of Gaston v. Coughlin, 182 A.D.2d 1085, 582 N.Y.S.2d 878; Matter of Leach v. Coughlin, 179 A.D.2d 1050, 579 N......
- Kremler v. Kremler
-
Ryan v. Pico
...for capturing escaped inmates was sufficient justification for denying petitioner access to these reports (see, Matter of Perron v. Coughlin, 199 A.D.2d 903, 904, 606 N.Y.S.2d 67; Matter of Feneque v. Selsky, 188 A.D.2d 819, 591 N.Y.S.2d 814). We also find no merit to the contention that it......
-
Echavarria-Brand v. Coombe
...of the source (see, Matter of Abdur-Raheem v. Mann, 85 N.Y.2d 113, 119, 623 N.Y.S.2d 758, 647 N.E.2d 1266; Matter of Perron v. Coughlin, 199 A.D.2d 903, 606 N.Y.S.2d 67; Matter of Gaston v. Coughlin, 182 A.D.2d 1085, 582 N.Y.S.2d 878). Although a face-to-face meeting between the Hearing Off......