Legal Opinion
Whitt v. Goord
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 31, 1999PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Determination unanimously modified on the law and as modified confirmed without costs and matter remitted to respondent for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: The determination that petitioner violated inmate rule 116.11 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [17] [ii] [tampering with personal property without authorization]) is supported by substantial evidence (see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139). The misbehavior report specifies that the security tape was broken on the television in petitioner’s cell. The testimony of petitioner that the tape was perfect when he…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People ex rel. Vega v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Foster v. CoughlinNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Brooks v. CoughlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
3Cited by9 opinions
- Pena v. GoordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Jordan v. DalyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Anderson v. GoordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Black v. GoordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Grof v. GoordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.