| Matter of Thomas v Fischer |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 03718 [106 AD3d 1343] |
| May 23, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Bernard Thomas, Appellant, v BrianFischer, as Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, et al.,Respondents. |
—[*1] Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank Brady of counsel), forrespondents.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (LaBuda, J.), entered March 28, 2012in Sullivan County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant toCPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctionsand Community Supervision withholding petitioner's good time allowance.
Petitioner was convicted of two counts of robbery in the first degree and one counteach of reckless endangerment in the first degree and assault in the first degree, and wassentenced in 1999 to serve an aggregate prison term of 16 years (People vThomas, 287 AD2d 326 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 688 [2001]). Heappeared before the Time Allowance Committee for an assessment as to whether anygood time would be applied toward the reduction of his sentence. The Committeedetermined that all available good time be withheld and, in relevant part, respondentCommissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision agreed upon administrativereview. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding in response, and nowappeals from Supreme Court's dismissal thereof.
We affirm. The determination to withhold some or all of an inmate's good time creditis a discretionary one, and will be upheld if made in accordance with law and premisedupon a review of the inmate's entire institutional record (see Matter of Procopio vFischer, 100 AD3d 1292, 1293 [2012]; Matter of Fowler v Fischer, 98 AD3d 1212, 1212 [2012]).Petitioner here [*2]has an extensive and seriousdisciplinary history while incarcerated, and those violations have persisted despite hispositive program accomplishments. The Commissioner considered the entirety of thathistory and institutional record and, as such, acted rationally in withholding all ofpetitioner's good time allowance (see Matter of Torres v Dubray, 64 AD3d 1027,1027 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 709 [2009]; Matter of Reed v Fischer, 54 AD3d 1088, 1088-1089[2008]; see also Correction Law § 803 [1] [a]).
We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be withoutmerit.
Rose, J.P., Spain, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed, without costs.