New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

WALKER v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2005-010-061, Claim No. 109306


Synopsis


Claim of inmate for excessive confinement is dismissed.

Case Information

UID:
2005-010-061
Claimant(s):
TROY T. WALKER
Claimant short name:
WALKER
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
109306
Motion number(s):

Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Terry Jane Ruderman
Claimant's attorney:
TROY T. WALKERPro Se
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General for the State of New YorkBy: Elyse Angelico, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
December 5, 2005
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision
Claimant, an inmate proceeding pro se, seeks damages for alleged excessive confinement following a July 30, 2003 incident where he was charged with lewd exposure at Sing Sing Correctional Facility (Sing Sing).
In his claim,
claimant asserts:
"I was sentenced to 90 days shu. I did 60 shu time, 30 keeplock. And was held 9 additional days without reason. I was suppost to be released back into population on 10/28/03. But was not released until 11/5/03. [sic]"

Claimant testified that he spent 15 extra days in keeplock and further that his hearing was reversed. He introduced into evidence a letter indicating that this was due to a witness issue (Ex. 1).
Lieutenant Edward Mydosh testified that he has been employed by the New York State Department of Correctional Services for 24 years and is presently the Disciplinary Lieutenant at Sing Sing. As part of his duties, he conducts Tier II hearings and assigns officers to do Tier III hearings. He reviewed
claimant's disciplinary records and explained that claimant was sentenced to 90 days on the July 30, 2003 lewd incident. However, claimant was not excessively confined. Rather, Mydosh explained that claimant had been disciplined for eight days regarding a previous lewd incident on July 23, 2003. Thus, claimant's confinement beyond the 90 days was not excessive because it was based on the July 23, 2003 incident. The records show that claimant was released from special housing unit on November 5, 2003, the same date asserted in the claim.
Upon consideration of all the evidence, including listening to the witnesses testify and observing their demeanor as they did so, this Court finds Mydosh's testimony to be credible and forthright and supported by the documentary evidence. Thus, the Court finds that
claimant's confinement was authorized and not excessive. Accordingly, claimant is not entitled to damages. Moreover, the fact that the charges were ultimately dismissed does not give rise to a cognizable cause of action where there is no evidence defendant acted inconsistently with its own rules and regulations (see Arteaga v State of New York 72 NY2d 212; Gittens v State of New York, 132 Misc 2d 399, 406).
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED DISMISSING CLAIM NO. 109306.


December 5, 2005
White Plains, New York

HON. TERRY JANE RUDERMAN
Judge of the Court of Claims