Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 New York opinions name it 1 courts 1979–2010 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Mobley v. Dubraygreen1 sentence2010To the extent that petitioner challenges the evidentiary basis of the determination, we conclude that the misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony of its author, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Mobley v Dubray, 57 AD3d 1055, 1056 [2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Hale v. Selskygreen1 sentence2010The contrary testimony of petitioner and other witnesses presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Hale v Selsky, 57 AD3d 1136, 1137 [2008], appeal dismissed 12 NY3d 776 [2009]). | 1 | 1 |
Barclay v. Goordgreen1 sentence2008The misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony and videotape, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Barclay v Goord, 23 AD3d 862, 862 [2005], lvs denied 6 NY3d 705 , 710 [2006]; Matter of Porter v McGinnis, 20 AD3d 641 [2005] ). | 1 | 1 |
Shakur v. Smithgreen1 sentence2008The determination of guilt is supported by substantial evidence in the form of the misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who authored it (see Matter of Shakur v Smith, 34 AD3d 898, 899 [2006]; Matter of Williams v Goord, 308 AD2d 614, 615 [2003]). | 1 | 1 |
Morillo v. Goordgreen1 sentence2008Conflicting testimony offered by petitioner created a credibility issue for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Morillo v Goord, 38 AD3d 947, 947-948 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
McKinley v. Goordgreen1 sentence2008The misbehavior report, the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who authored it, and the hearing testimony from a nurse confirming that petitioner did not have a prescription for the medication in question comprise substantial evidence in support of the determination of guilt (see Matter of McKinley v Goord, 40 AD3d 1280, 1280 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 807 [2007]; Matter of Matthews v Goord, 275 AD2d 841, 841 [2000]). | 1 | 1 |
McCloud v. Selskygreen1 sentence2008To the extent that petitioner’s allegations can be construed as forming a challenge to the determination of guilt on the ground that the evidence in support thereof was insufficient, we find that the detailed misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who witnessed the incident and authored the report, provide substantial evidence to uphold the determination (see Matter of McCloud v Selsky, 45 AD3d 1127, 1128 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
Gawlick v. Fischergreen1 sentence2008Petitioner’s exculpatory statements created credibility issues for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Gawlik v Fischer, 50 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Harvey v. Woodsgreen1 sentence2008To the extent that petitioner challenges the determination of guilt on an evidentiary basis, the misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who found the weapon and authored the report, provide substantial evidence to support the determination (s ee Matter of Harvey v Woods, 53 AD3d 988, 988 [2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Taylor v. Caldwellgreen1 sentence2008The misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony from the library clerk who authored it, constitute substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Taylor v Caldwell, 51 AD3d 1234, 1234 [2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Jenkins v. Selskygreen1 sentence2008Regarding petitioner’s claim of hearing officer bias, it is neither substantiated by the record nor is there any indication that the determination flowed from any purported bias (see Matter of Jenkins v Selsky, 51 AD3d 1239, 1240 [2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Matthews v. Goordgreen1 sentence2008The misbehavior report, the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who authored it, and the hearing testimony from a nurse confirming that petitioner did not have a prescription for the medication in question comprise substantial evidence in support of the determination of guilt (see Matter of McKinley v Goord, 40 AD3d 1280, 1280 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 807 [2007]; Matter of Matthews v Goord, 275 AD2d 841, 841 [2000]). | 1 | 1 |
Proctor v. Goordgreen1 sentence2008Contrary testimony offered by petitioner and his inmate witness created a credibility issue to be resolved by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Proctor v Goord, 290 AD2d 801, 801 [2002]). | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Goordgreen1 sentence2008The determination of guilt is supported by substantial evidence in the form of the misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony from the correction officer who authored it (see Matter of Shakur v Smith, 34 AD3d 898, 899 [2006]; Matter of Williams v Goord, 308 AD2d 614, 615 [2003]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
MATTER OF HALE v. Selsky
neutral
1 sentence2010The contrary testimony of petitioner and other witnesses presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Hale v Selsky, 57 AD3d 1136, 1137 [2008], appeal dismissed 12 NY3d 776 [2009]). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Porter v. McGinnis
green
1 sentence2008The misbehavior report, together with the corroborating hearing testimony and videotape, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Barclay v Goord, 23 AD3d 862, 862 [2005], lvs denied 6 NY3d 705 , 710 [2006]; Matter of Porter v McGinnis, 20 AD3d 641 [2005] ). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lewis v. Goord
green
1 sentence2008To the extent that petitioner asserts that the charges were issued as a means of retaliation for a grievance and lawsuit he had filed, that presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Lewis v Goord, 43 AD3d 1259 [2007]). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
People v. Hamlin
green
1 sentence1979The prosecutor’s questions in this regard constituted error since their purport was to implant in the jurors’ minds "the baseless proposition” that the corroborating defense testimony of defendant’s fiancée was unworthy of belief simply because she did not divulge whatever information she possessed to law enforcement authorities or defense counsel before hand (see People v Hamlin, 58 AD2d 631, 632 ); and (3) During his direct examination defendant testified that he had been enrolled in a preparatory course for a high school equivalency examination and had been attending classes regularly, i.e. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.