Glenn v. Coughlin

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Petitioner contends that he was denied his right to an employee assistant (see, 7 NYCRR 251-4.1 [a] [2]). Petitioner originally selected from an established list an employee assistant who was available only to inmates confined to a special housing unit. Petitioner was not confined to that unit and the employee assistant chosen was not available to him. A notation on the assistance selection form read: "note: Inmate in D.A. status—not allowed to pick J. Algier. 1-24-89 Inmate allowed to pick another assistant”. Petitioner’s tier III hearing commenced…