Davies v. Johnson
Opinion of the Court
—Determination unanimously confirmed and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The determination made at petitioner’s Tier III disciplinary hearing that petitioner violated inmate rule 108.14 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [9] [v]) is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964). Moreover, we conclude that petitioner was not deprived of his right to call witnesses; the Hearing Officer made a meaningful effort to locate and produce those witnesses (see, Matter of Salcedo v Coughlin, 197 AD2d 729). Finally, we reject the contention that petitioner was deprived of due process because he did not receive the employee assistant of his choice. Petitioner signed a waiver form indicating that he did not want employee assistance at his disciplinary hearing, thus expressly making a
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.