You are here: / / Denial of Inmate’s Request for Evidence and Failure to Include Confidential T...
,

Denial of Inmate’s Request for Evidence and Failure to Include Confidential Testimony Required Annulment

In annulling the disciplinary determination, the Third Department noted the Hearing Officer’s failure to explain the denial of the inmate’s request for evidence and failure to include confidential testimony which was relied upon:

Inasmuch as the record before us fails to include any  explanation for the denial of the requested evidence, which may have prejudiced his defense, and is incomplete in that it does not include the confidential testimony taken and relied upon by the Hearing Officer in reaching the determination, we  are unable to undertake meaningful review… .  Matter of Gallagher, 514650, 3rd Dept 7-3-13

 

You might also like
COMMISSIONER AND CENTRAL OFFICE REVIEW COMMITTEE ARE NOT NECESSARY PARTIES FOR A REVIEW OF A DISCIPLINARY DETERMINATION 3RD DEPT.
FRAUD CAUSE OF ACTION PROPERLY DISMISSED BECAUSE (1) IT WAS DUPLICATIVE OF THE BREACH OF CONTRACT CAUSE OF ACTION AND (2) PLAINTIFF, AS A SOPHISTICATED BUSINESS ENTITY, COULD NOT ARGUE IT RELIED ON ORAL REPRESENTATIONS WHICH CONTRADICTED THE WRITTEN CONTRACT; STRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTACHMENT NOT MET.
CLAIMANT’S UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS PROPERLY REDUCED TO ZERO BECAUSE CLAIMANT’S PENSION EXCEEDED THE AMOUNT OF THE BENEFITS (THIRD DEPT).
Failure to Assess Reliability of Confidential Informants Required Annulment and Expungement
Appraisal Report Lacking Required Supporting Data Properly Struck
CLAIMANT PROPERLY FOUND TO HAVE A 35% LOSS OF WAGE EARNING CAPACITY DESPITE HIS HAVING RETURNED TO WORK FULL-TIME.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A DEFAULT JUDGMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DENIED AND DEFENDANT’S CROSS MOTION TO RENEW SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED, CRITERIA EXPLAINED; E-FILING WAS VOLUNTARY IN CHENANGO COUNTY SO FAILURE TO E-FILE WAS NOT A GROUND FOR REJECTION OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION PAPERS (THIRD DEPT).
HERE TWO DISSENTERS ARGUED THE JUDGE DID NOT MAKE THE REQUIRED FINDINGS THAT THE PROSECUTOR’S RACE-NEUTRAL REASONS FOR PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES WERE NON-PRETEXTUAL (THIRD DEPT).

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2025 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Failure to Transcribe Entire Hearing Required Annulment Violation of Inmate’s Right to Call a Witness Required Expungement