Hyperlawhypertext legal database Ramos v. Herbert 256 A.D.2d 1191

← Cases

Ramos v. Herbert

256 A.D.2d 1191 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1998-12-31 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1191
In the Matter of Pedro Ramos, Petitioner, v Victor Herbert, as Superintendent of Collins Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.
[685 NYS2d 143]

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner challenges a prison disciplinary determination finding him guilty of various inmate rule violations and imposing a penalty of 90 days in the Special Housing Unit with a concomitant loss of good time and privileges. Petitioner challenges the determination on the ground that respondents failed to serve petitioner with a written statement of the evidence relied upon in reaching the determination and the reasons for the penalty imposed, in violation of due process and 7 NYCRR 254.7 (a) (5).

Because the petition does not raise a substantial evidence question, the proceeding was improperly transferred to us pursuant to CPLR 7804 (g). Nevertheless, we decide the matter in the interest of judicial economy (see, Matter of Moulden v Coughlin, 210 AD2d 997 ).

Addressing the merits, we conclude that the Hearing Officer

p. 1192
provided petitioner with a written statement of disposition, as required by due process and the regulation (see, Matter of Wolff v McDonnell, 418 US 539 , 563-565; Matter of Laureano v Kuhlmann, 75 NY2d 141 , 146). The completed form attached to the answer sets forth the evidence relied upon by the Hearing Officer and the reasons for the penalties imposed (see, Matter of Bernacet v Coughlin, 145 AD2d 802 , 804, lv denied 74 NY2d 603 ; Matter of Jackson v Coughlin, 129 AD2d 639 , 641). There is no support for petitioner’s contention that the form is a forgery. (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Fahey, J.) Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Cases cited