Gee v. Goord, 21 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005). · Go Syfert
Search
Gee v. Goord, 21 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events (14 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Gonzalez v. Annucci (nyappdiv, 2019-01-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Gonzalez v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
With regard to the remaining charges, the misbehavior report and supporting testimony at the hearing provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt, notwithstanding the fact that the contraband was never recovered ( see Matter of Douglas v Fischer , 115 AD3d 1103 , 1103 [2014]; Matter of Gee v Goord , 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Sparks v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
The misbehavior report, hearing testimony and *1353 the related documentary evidence, including the X rays, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Hall v Fischer, 87 AD3d 1235, 1236 [2011]; Matter of Scott v Fischer, 75 AD3d 962, 962 [2010]; Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tavarez v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Although petitioner denied writing the letter and maintained that he complied with strip frisk procedures, his testimony presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tavarez v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Although petitioner denied writing the letter and maintained that he complied with strip frisk procedures, his testimony presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) in Matter of Marc Douglas v. Fischer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Although no physical evidence was found after petitioner was placed on a two-day contraband watch, the misbehavior report and supporting testimony at the hearing nevertheless provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Kimble v Fischer, 56 AD3d 879 , 880 [2008]; Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) in Matter of Marc Douglas v. Fischer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Although no physical evidence was found after petitioner was placed on a two-day contraband watch, the misbehavior report and supporting testimony at the hearing nevertheless provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Kimble v Fischer, 56 AD3d 879 , 880 [2008]; Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Scott v. Fischer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2010 · confidence medium
And, although the subsequent X ray and results of the contraband watch may have supported a different determination, we find the determination of guilt to be properly supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matias v. Selsky
N.Y. App. Div. · 2007 · confidence medium
The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the correction officer who authored it, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cunningham v. Selsky
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the correction counselor who prepared it and witnessed the incident, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]; Matter of Valentine v Goord, 18 AD3d 997, 998 [2005], lv dismissed 5 NY3d 816 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Deoleo v. Selsky
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
As for the charge of refusing a direct order, we find that it is supported by substantial evidence consisting of the misbehavior report and testimony of its author, which indicate that petitioner failed to delete unauthorized materials from his computer disks after he was directed to do so (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hayes v. Goord
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
Petitioner’s assertion that he had nothing to do with smuggling drugs into the facility presented a credibility issue for the hearing officer to resolve (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Steward v. Goord
N.Y. App. Div. · 2005 · confidence medium
The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the correction officer who prepared it, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]; Matter of Alvarez v Goord, 17 AD3d 945, 946 [2005]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Raqiyb v. Goord
N.Y. App. Div. · 2005 · confidence medium
The misbehavior report and petitioner’s admission that he hid a note in his underwear while moving from one part of facility to the other provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [15] [i]; Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]; Matter of De Matteis v Selsky, 19 AD3d 958, 959 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 717 [2005]).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Billue v. Goord
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Moreover, the misbehavior report and testimony of the correction officer who prepared it constitute substantial evidence supporting the finding of guilt on the remaining charges (see id. at 944 ; see also Matter of Gee v Goord, 21 AD3d 636, 637 [2005]).
In the Matter of Carl Gee
v.
Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Aug 4, 2005.
21 A.D.3d 636
2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8283
Cited by 14 opinions  |  Published

[*637] 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 respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

When petitioner bent over during a strip frisk, a blue balloon fell from his anus which he proceeded to put in his mouth and swallow. He was placed in temporary isolation on a drug watch for two days during which time he defecated twice, but no drugs were found. Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with smuggling, possessing contraband, violating frisk and search procedures and refusing a direct order. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of all charges except refusing a direct order. The determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, resulting in this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of its author, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Borcsok v Selsky, 296 AD2d 678, 678 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 616 [2002]; Matter of Rosati v Senkowski, 221 AD2d 675, 676 [1995]). Although no drugs were recovered as a result of the drug watch, the blue balloon constituted contraband inasmuch as it was an article not authorized by the superintendent or his designee (see 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xiv]). Inasmuch as petitioner secreted this item on his person following a visit, he smuggled it from one part of the facility to another (see 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [15] [i]). His subsequent attempt to dispose of the item by swallowing it violated frisk and search procedures (see 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [16]), notwithstanding the absence of a direct order prohibiting him from doing so. Petitioner’s denial of the incident and claim that the correction officer mistook blue dots on his underwear for the balloon presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Spulka v Goord, 12 AD3d 1004, 1005 [2004]).

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.