New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Correction Law § 112 (2026)

Powers and duties of commissioner relating to correctional facilities and community supervision

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 112. Powers and duties of commissioner relating to correctional
facilities and community supervision. 1. The commissioner of corrections
and community supervision shall have the superintendence, management and
control of the correctional facilities in the department and of the
incarcerated individuals confined therein, and of all matters relating
to the government, discipline, policing, contracts and fiscal concerns
thereof. He or she shall have the power and it shall be his or her duty
to inquire into all matters connected with said correctional facilities.
He or she shall make such rules and regulations, not in conflict with
the statutes of this state, for the government of the officers and other
employees of the department assigned to said facilities, and in regard
to the duties to be performed by them, and for the government and
discipline of each correctional facility, as he or she may deem proper,
and shall cause such rules and regulations to be recorded by the
superintendent of the facility, and a copy thereof to be furnished to
each employee assigned to the facility. He or she shall also prescribe a
system of accounts and records to be kept at each correctional facility,
which system shall be uniform at all of said facilities, and he or she
shall also make rules and regulations for a record of photographs and
other means of identifying each incarcerated individual received into
said facilities. He or she shall appoint and remove, subject to the
civil service law, subordinate officers and other employees of the
department who are assigned to correctional facilities.
  2. The commissioner shall have the management and control of persons
released on community supervision and of all matters relating to such
persons' effective reentry into the community, as well as all contracts
and fiscal concerns thereof. The commissioner shall have the power and
it shall be his or her duty to inquire into all matters connected with
said community supervision. The commissioner shall make such rules and
regulations, not in conflict with the statutes of this state, for the
governance of the officers and other employees of the department
assigned to said community supervision, and in regard to the duties to
be performed by them, as he or she deems proper and shall cause such
rules and regulations to be furnished to each employee assigned to
perform community supervision. The commissioner shall also prescribe a
system of accounts and records to be kept, which shall be uniform. The
commissioner shall also make rules and regulations for a record of
photographs and other means of identifying each incarcerated individual
released to community supervision. The commissioner shall appoint
officers and other employees of the department who are assigned to
perform community supervision.
  3. The commissioner may require reports from the superintendent or any
other officer or employee of the department assigned to any correctional
facility or to perform community supervision in relation to his or her
conduct as such officer or employee, and shall have the power to inquire
into any improper conduct which may be alleged to have been committed by
any person at any correctional facility or in the course of his or her
performance of community supervision, and for that purpose to issue
subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses, and the production
before him or her of books, writings and papers. A subpoena issued under
this section shall be regulated by the civil practice law and rules.
  4. The commissioner and the chair of the parole board shall work
jointly to develop and implement, as soon as practicable, a risk and
needs assessment instrument or instruments, which shall be empirically
validated, that would be administered to incarcerated individuals upon
reception into a correctional facility, and throughout their
incarceration and release to community supervision, to facilitate
appropriate programming both during an incarcerated individual's
incarceration and community supervision, and designed to facilitate the
successful integration of incarcerated individuals into the community.
  5. (a) The commissioner shall not make or promulgate any policy and/or
regulation requiring an incarcerated individual to waive any religious
right, including, but not limited to, daily prayer as a condition for
participation in any incarcerated individual program including any such
program developed and/or implemented pursuant to subdivision four of
this section including, but not limited to, the shock program and the
industrial training program.
  (b) Upon request, incarcerated individuals shall be granted exemptions
for activities, including jobs, that coincide with the Sabbath and other
work proscription days, including those set forth in the religious
calendar.
  6. (a) The commissioner shall promulgate rules and regulations to
establish and maintain an annual heat mitigation plan to ensure
incarcerated individuals and correctional facility staff have options
available to stay cool, hydrated and safe during high heat temperatures.
Such plan shall include, to the extent possible:
  (i) access to industrial fans, water, ice, and additional access to
showers;
  (ii) commissaries fully stocked with personal fans prior to the
beginning of summer;
  (iii) monitoring temperatures in housing, program and industry areas;
  (iv) maintaining a list of incarcerated individuals and correctional
facility staff who have medical conditions that make them more
susceptible to heat and monitor their well-being;
  (v) increased rounds and wellness checks; and
  (vi) providing shade on exercise yards if consistent with the
facility's safety and security protocols.
  (b) The commissioner, as part of such heat mitigation plan, shall
evaluate the financial and operational feasibility of establishing
cooling stations and a permanent sustainable cooling solution at each
facility, provided that upon a determination or finding that a permanent
sustainable cooling solution is feasible in each facility, the
commissioner shall develop a timeline to implement the findings of such
evaluation.
  7. (a) For the purposes of this subdivision the following terms shall
have the following meanings:
  (i) "Substantiated allegation" means an allegation that was
investigated and determined to have occurred. An allegation is
determined to have occurred based on a preponderance of the evidence;
  (ii) "Unfounded allegation" means an allegation that was investigated
and determined not to have occurred;
  (iii) "Unsubstantiated allegation" means an allegation that was
investigated and the investigation produced insufficient evidence to
make a final determination as to whether or not the event occurred.
  (b) The commissioner shall collect data from the office of special
investigations established by the department and report quarterly to the
speaker of the assembly, the temporary president of the senate, and the
governor regarding complaints received the previous quarter by the
office. For the report period, such data and report shall include, but
not be limited to:
  (i) the number of substantiated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded
allegations received by the office of special investigations categorized
by location of the alleged incident, complaint type or allegation,
subject of the allegation (i.e. incarcerated individual, security staff,
civilian staff, or other), and how the allegation was received by the
office;
  (ii) the total number of complaints: assigned for an investigation by
the office of special investigations; assigned to each division or unit
within the office of special investigations; referred to the appropriate
central office division head; referred to a facility superintendent or
community supervision bureau chief for investigation; referred to a
facility superintendent or community supervision bureau chief for other
appropriate action; and referred to a state, local, or federal agency
with jurisdiction. Such data shall include the location of the alleged
incident and the complaint type or allegation;
  (iii) the total number of investigations closed by each office of
special investigations unit or division within the reporting time
period;
  (iv) the total number of referrals for criminal prosecution. Such data
shall include the location of the alleged incident, the complaint type
or allegation, and the subject of the allegation (i.e. incarcerated
individual, security staff, civilian staff, or other);
  (v) the total number of referrals to the department's bureau of labor
relations for consideration of employee disciplinary charges including
the location of the alleged incident; and
  (vi) office of special investigations staffing data including the
total number of staff, position type, and number of open positions.
  (c) The commissioner shall report annually the average length of time
to close an investigation by the office of special investigation by
division for each correctional facility and any recommendations made by
the office of special investigations to the relevant departmental
program areas for consideration of a revision to a policy or procedure.
Such report shall categorize such recommendations by facility, the
nature of the recommendation, and any action taken in response to the
recommendation.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Arteaga v. State of New York, 527 N.E.2d 1194 (NY 1988).
Arteaga v. State of New York, 527 N.E.2d 1194 (NY 1988). · cites it 4× “We hold that where, as here, the employees act under the authority of and in full compliance with the governing statutes and regulations (Correction Law §§ 112, 137; 7 NYCRR parts 250-254), their actions constitute discretionary conduct of a quasi-judicial nature for which the…”
Montane v. Evans, 116 A.D.3d 197 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 2× “The amendment further specified that the procedures “shall incorporate risk and needs principles to measure the rehabilitation of persons appearing before the [B]card [and] the likelihood of success of such persons upon release,” and directed the development of an instrument…”
People ex rel. Green v. Superintendent of Sullivan Corr. Facility, 137 A.D.3d 56 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). · cites it 2× “We also recognize that Correction Law § 112 empowers DOCCS with extensive authority to manage and control a person’s release into the community, but the statute makes a specific distinction between inmates confined in a correctional facility (see Correction Law § 112 [1]) and…”
Allah v. Coughlin, 190 A.D.2d 233 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). · cites it 2× “Petitioners, citing to Correction Law §§ 112, 137 and 138, contend that the Commissioner does not have the authority to levy a monetary penalty for disciplinary infractions at a correctional facility absent the grant of such power by the Legislature.”
Jones v. Smith, 478 N.E.2d 191 (NY 1985). “retary of State as provided for in article IV, §8 of the Constitution and Executive Law § 102, the Commissioner contending that they pertain to matters falling within the “organization or internal management” exception to these filing requirements, and thus that the Commissioner…”
Holloway v. State, 285 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001). “We further note that there is insufficient evidence in this record of any violation of Correction Law § 112 or § 137 or 7 NYCRR parts 250-254 (see, id.”
Kozlowski v. Coughlin, 539 F. Supp. 852 (S.D.N.Y. 1982). “Pursuant to N.Y.Correc.Law §§ 112 and 146, the New York Commissioner of Corrections has promulgated regulations that establish “minimum requirements” for correctional facilities throughout the state.”
Matter of Brooks v. New York State Dept. of Corr. & Cmty. Supervision, 2023 NY Slip Op 03962 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023). “To that end, we initially agree with petitioner that Correction Law § 112 (3) did not authorize a subpoena under these circumstances, as the search did not concern petitioner's conduct at a correctional facility or during the performance of community supervision.”
Rudolph v. Cuomo, 916 F. Supp. 1308 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). “N.Y.Correct.Law § 112(1) (McKinney 1987).”
Hilliard v. Scully, 537 F. Supp. 1084 (S.D.N.Y. 1982). “N.Y.Correc.Law § 112 (McKinney Supp. 1981 1982).”
Treacy v. State, 131 Misc. 2d 849 (1986). “Rather, the Commissioner’s right to carry out constitutionally permissible discipline and his power to establish rules governing proceedings within correctional institutions (Correction Law § 112) mandates that no such action be permitted (see, Matter of Gunn v Ward, 71 AD2d 856…”
Arteaga v. State, 125 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986). “Further, the Legislature has vested a great deal of discretion in the Department of Correctional Services with regard to the disciplining of inmates (see, Correction Law § 112 [1]; § 137 [2]; Matter of Baker v Wilmot, 65 AD2d 884, 885 , lv denied 46 NY2d 710 ).”
— N.Y. Correction Law § 112(1) — 2 cases
Rudolph v. Cuomo, 916 F. Supp. 1308 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). “N.Y.Correct.Law § 112(1) (McKinney 1987).”
Horne v. Coughlin, 795 F. Supp. 72 (N.D.N.Y. 1991).
— N.Y. Correction Law § 112(3) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.