Matter of Rafael Cortorreal v. Anthony J. Annucci

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that a prison disciplinary hearing officer violates an inmate's right to call witnesses by failing to conduct a meaningful inquiry into an allegation that a requested witness was coerced into refusing to testify. The court held that a witness refusal stating that the inmate did not want to be involved or did not wish to testify generally provides a sufficient reason for refusal, but that allegations of coercion require further inquiry. The court reversed, annulled the disciplinary determination, and directed expungement because the parties agreed that a fair rehearing was no longer possible.

Holdings

1. A simple statement on a witness-refusal form that the requested inmate does not want to be involved or does not wish to testify is generally sufficient to protect the requesting inmate's right to call that witness.
2. When a refusing inmate witness alleges by affidavit that the witness was coerced into refusing to testify at the hearing or a related proceeding, the hearing officer must undertake a meaningful inquiry into the allegation. The hearing officer's failure to do so violated Cortorreal's right to call witnesses and required annulment of the disciplinary determination.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a requested inmate witness's statement that the witness does not want to be involved or does not wish to testify adequately states a reason for refusing to testify.
2. Whether a prison disciplinary hearing officer must conduct a meaningful inquiry when a refusing inmate witness alleges that coercion or intimidation caused the refusal.

Disposition

reversed