Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990

Mabery v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided December 27, 1990

168 A.D.2d 879; 564 N.Y.S.2d 553; 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15774

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Williams v. Selsky (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
Williams v. Selsky (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
Dawes v. Selsky (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
Hawkins v. Coombe (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
Torres v. Coughlin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
Varela v. Coughlin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
Patterson v. Senkowski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

The misbehavior report was written by the correction officer who conducted the search of petitioner’s coat which revealed the weapon at issue. Furthermore, the report was corroborated by a photograph of the weapon and the testimony of two additional eyewitnesses to the incident (see, Matter of Hernandez v LeFevre, 150 AD2d 954, lv denied 74 NY2d 615). Petitioner’s claim that the weapon was not his and was placed in his coat by someone else merely presented a question of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, supra). The weapon was also found in an area within petitioner’s control even though his access may not have been exclusive; accordingly, the determination of guilt on the weapons charge was supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Caldwell v Coughlin, 148 AD2d 905). Petitioner’s remaining claims have been considered and found to be without merit.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.