Barranco v. Coughlin, 222 A.D.2d 904 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995). · Go Syfert
Barranco v. Coughlin, 222 A.D.2d 904 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Dukes v. Goord
N.Y. App. Div. · 2005 · confidence medium
Moreover, petitioner was not improperly denied the opportunity to present the testimony of the physician who treated the victim but did not observe the assault, as his testimony was not relevant to the charge (see Matter of Caraway v Herbert, 285 AD2d 778, 778 [2001]; Matter of Barranco v Coughlin, 222 AD2d 904, 905 [1995]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Jeffrey Barranco
v.
Thomas Coughlin, III, as Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 21, 1995.
222 A.D.2d 904
Cited by 5 opinions  |  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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, was involved in a physical altercation with a correction officer. Following a hearing, petitioner was found guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules prohibiting inmates from assaulting prison personnel, possessing an item that may be classified as a weapon or that has been altered to change its original purpose, and refusing a direct order. Petitioner contends that the administrative determination is not supported by substantial evidence and that he was improperly denied the right to call a witness at the hear[*905] ing. Upon review of the record, we find that the misbehavior report constitutes substantial evidence supporting the determination. We further find that inasmuch as the nurse who examined petitioner after the altercation was not a witness to the incident in question, the Hearing Officer properly excluded her testimony as irrelevant.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.