Matter of Rivera v Goord
2008 NY Slip Op 00393 [47 AD3d 1141]
January 24, 2008
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, March 12, 2008


In the Matter of Eddie Rivera, Petitioner, v Glenn S. Goord, asCommissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[*1]Eddie Rivera, Comstock, petitioner pro se.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the SupremeCourt, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitionerguilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with violating various prison disciplinaryrules after a strip search resulted in the discovery of a two-inch razor weapon. Petitioner pleadedguilty to interference, refusing a direct order and refusing frisk procedures and, after a tier IIIhearing, was found guilty of possessing a weapon. The determination was affirmed uponadministrative appeals, prompting this proceeding.

Petitioner's plea of guilty precludes him from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence asto those charges to which he pleaded guilty (see Matter of Spencer v Goord, 38 AD3d 1028, 1028 [2007], lvdenied 9 NY3d 802 [2007]; Matterof Caraway v Goord, 34 AD3d 962, 963 [2006]). As to the remaining possession of aweapon charge, the misbehavior report and the testimony of the correction officer who authoredit, together with the related documentation and videotape of the incident, provide substantialevidence of petitioner's guilt (see Matterof Abdullah v Selsky, 45 AD3d 1072, 1073 [2007]; Matter of Roye v Goord, 34 AD3d 1134 [2006]). Contrary topetitioner's contention, the Hearing Officer was not required to independently assess thecredibility of the confidential information that may have prompted the search because suchinformation was not relied upon as the basis for the determination of guilt (see Matter of Wan v Goord, 32 AD3d1122, 1123 [2006]; Matter of Rolon v Goord, 30 AD3d [*2]946, 948 [2006]).

Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and determined to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Peters, Spain, Lahtinen and Kavanagh, JJ., concur. Adjudged that thedetermination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.