Matter of Harrison v Bertone

Annotate this Case
Matter of Harrison v Bertone 2008 NY Slip Op 03365 [50 AD3d 1352] April 17, 2008 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 18, 2008

In the Matter of Stoney Harrison, Petitioner, v M. Bertone, as Correction Sergeant, et al., Respondents.

—[*1] Stoney Harrison, Wallkill, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondents.

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

After another inmate was found to be in possession of audio cassettes that were intended for petitioner along with a letter directing petitioner on how to proceed with the sale of the cassettes, a search of petitioner's prison cell recovered numerous prohibited items, including audio cassettes and handwritten notes with information pertaining to the sale of cassettes. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of solicitation and possession of contraband. That determination was administratively affirmed and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

Petitioner asserts that the portion of the determination which found him guilty of solicitation must be annulled. We disagree, noting that the misbehavior report, together with the hearing testimony from the authoring correction officer, provide substantial evidence to support the determination (see Matter of McCloud v Selsky, 45 AD3d 1127, 1128 [2007]; Matter of Chavis v Goord, 45 AD3d 1063, 1064 [2007]). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claims that the hearing was untimely and the Hearing Officer acted unfairly, have been examined and found to be unpersuasive. [*2]

Peters, J.P., Spain, Lahtinen, Kavanagh and Stein, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.