Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » New Jersey » Appellate Court » 2007 » GINO GENTILE v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
GINO GENTILE v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
State: New Jersey
Court: Court of Appeals
Docket No: a1727-06
Case Date: 05/30/2007
Plaintiff: GINO GENTILE
Defendant: DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Preview:a1727-06.opn.html

Original Wordprocessor Version
(NOTE: The status of this decision is Unpublished.) Original Wordprocessor Version

This case can also be found at *CITE_PENDING*. (NOTE: The status of this decision is unpublished.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1727-06T21727-06T2 GINO GENTILE, Appellant, vs. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent. __________________________________

Submitted: May 16, 2007 - Decided May 30, 2007 Before Judges Cuff and Winkelstein. On appeal from a Final Decision of the Department of Corrections. Gino Gentile, appellant pro se. Stuart Rabner, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Patrick DeAlmeida, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Lisa A. Puglisi, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief). PER CURIAM Appellant Gino Gentile is an inmate at New Jersey State Prison. He was charged with and found guilty of two disciplinary infractions: *.151, setting a fire, and *.306, conduct which disrupts or interferes with the security or orderly running of the correctional facility. N.J.A.C. 10A:4-4.1(a). The hearing officer imposed the following sanction: fifteen days detention, 365 days administrative segregation, and 365 days loss of commutation time for each infraction.

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a1727-06.opn.html[4/20/2013 2:55:13 PM]

a1727-06.opn.html

On appeal, appellant presents the following arguments: Point I THE DECISION OF THE HEARING OFFICER VIOLATES DUE PROCESS AND SHOULD BE VACATED. Point II THE HEARING OFFICER[']S DECISION FAILED TO ARTICULATE FACTS ESTABLISHING THE APPELLANT[']S GUILT. Our review of the record satisfies us that the findings of fact are well-supported by the record, Rule 2:11-3(e)(1)(D), and that appellant received all the process he is due. Avant v. Clifford, 67 N.J. 496, 522-24 (1975); N.J.A.C. 10A:4-9.1 to -9.16. Affirmed.

(continued) (continued) 2 A-1727-06T2 May 30, 2007 0x01 graphic

This archive is a service of Rutgers School of Law - Camden. This archive is a service of Rutgers School of Law - Camden.

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a1727-06.opn.html[4/20/2013 2:55:13 PM]

Download a1727-06.opn.pdf

New Jersey Law

New Jersey State Laws
New Jersey Tax
New Jersey Labor Laws
New Jersey Agencies
    > New Jersey DMV

Comments

Tips