Lewis v. Leclaire, 48 A.D.3d 875 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2008). · Go Syfert
Lewis v. Leclaire, 48 A.D.3d 875 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Cited for
At page 875 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…1 citing caseopening of page *875 (no citing court says what it cites this page for)
  • Matter of Davis v. Annucci, 123 A.D.3d 1279 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2014).published
    The misbehavior report, unusual incident report and testimony at the hearing, including that of the nurse involved in the incident, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Lewis v Leclaire, 48 AD3d…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Jessie Lewis
v.
Lucien J. Leclaire, Jr., as Commissioner of Correctional Services
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Feb 14, 2008.
Published opinion
48 A.D.3d 875
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

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.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, was charged in a misbehavior report with threatening another inmate, engaging in inappropriate physical contact with another inmate and committing a sex offense. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of all three charges. That determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. Notwithstanding petitioner’s assertions to the contrary, the misbehavior report, together with the hearing testimony from the authoring correction officer and complaining inmate, comprise substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Clark v Goord, 32 AD3d 1142, 1143 [2006]). Petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his claim that the charges were not properly investigated, have been examined and found to be without merit.

[*876] Mercure, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Kane and Malone Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.