Matter of Villafane v Fischer
2009 NY Slip Op 05053 [63 AD3d 1403]
June 18, 2009
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 5, 2009


In the Matter of Anthony Villafane, Petitioner, v Brian Fischer, asCommissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[*1]Anthony Villafane, Dannemora, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet 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 foundpetitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, worked as a book runner in the law library assisting inmates inobtaining documents, as well as providing typing services. While petitioner was performing hisduties, a correction officer checked his delivery bag and found grievance materials that petitionershould not have had in his possession. Petitioner told the officer that another inmate had askedhim to type these materials. As a result of this incident, petitioner was charged in a misbehaviorreport with smuggling, lying and possessing grievance documents pertaining to another inmate.He was found guilty of the charges following a tier III disciplinary hearing, and thedetermination was affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the testimony presented at the hearing,provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Williams v Walsh, 56AD3d 923 [2008]; Matter ofTriplett v Fischer, 54 AD3d 1075, 1076 [2008]). Contrary to petitioner's claim, althoughthere are some gaps in the hearing transcript, [*2]they are not sosignificant as to preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Wigfall v Goord, 53 AD3d 943, 943-944 [2008]; Matter of Butler v Selsky, 49 AD3d1122, 1123 [2008]). Accordingly, we will not disturb respondent's determination.Petitioner's remaining argument has been considered and found to be lacking merit.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose, Malone Jr. and McCarthy, 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.