Petitioner Clifton Hunt, #XX-X-XXXX, through his attorney Leah R. Nowotarski, Esq., seeks relief pursuant to CPLR Article 78 dated August 30, 2023. Petitioner contests the legality of DOCC's refusal to follow Directive 4913 from May 3, 2020 through present at the Attica Correctional Facility. As a result, the Petitioner lost personal items.

On November 1, 2023, the Respondent claimed there is no merit to the Petitioner's claims and Petitioner's grievance complaints were thoroughly investigated.

Directive 4913 states in pertinent part, that "[n]o inmate shall possess property (combined state and personal property), including legal material, in excess of that which can be placed in four (4) standard Departmental draft bags." It further provides that "[a]n inmate with excess legal material may possess one additional draft bag of legal material upon demonstrating that such material pertains to active legal cases."

The Petitioner's claim is that on June 11, 2022 a porter provided the Petitioner with 5 draft bags for transport of his property for moving to a different cell bock withing the same correctional facility. One of those bags contained active legal material. After packing all his property into those 5 bags, Correction Officer Ruda limited Mr. Hunt to 4 bags. As a result, the Petitioner had to dispose of personal items. The Petitioner then filed a grievance.^[FN1] The Petitioner [*2]was not granted a hearing and the Acting Superintendent forwarded the appeal for processing.^[FN2]

The Respondent claims that in order to possesses a 5th bag, one of those bags must be for legal material, then the incarcerated individual needs special permission from the facility administration in the form of a permit. The Petitioner did not have a permit and was unable to demonstrate that his extra bag of legal material pertained to active cases.^[FN3]

The Court's power to review an administrative decision denying a grievance is limited. In order to prevail, the petitioner must demonstrate that the determination made upon the grievance lacked any rational basis, see Matter of Sylvester v. Fischer, 126 AD3d 1330 [4th Dept., 2015]; Matter of Patel v. Fischer, 67 AD3d 1193 [3rd Dept., 2009], leave to appeal denied by 14 NY3d 703 [2010]; Matter of Green v. Bradt, 69 AD3d 1269, 1270 [3rd Dept., 2010], leave to appeal denied by 14 NY3d 710 [2010]).

Here, the record shows that the grievance was fully investigated and denied by the Superintendent and the CORC ^[FN4] for the reasons stated in their decisions. Moreover, the petitioner has not demonstrated in his petition that he is entitled by statute, directive or regulation to what he is currently seeking, namely, a 5th bag for his personal belongings. See People v. Fischer, 97 AD3d 877.

In view of this, as well as the many legitimate reasons for limiting the amount of property that inmates may possess, the Court concludes that CORC's denial of petitioner's grievance was not irrational, arbitrary and/or capricious or affected by an error of law. See Matter of Green v. Fischer, 77 AD3d 1011.

After a review of the facts, law and exhibits in the case, this Court DENIES Petitioner's motion. Petitioner's grievance was investigated and found to be without merit.

This Court has considered Petitioner's remaining claims and find them either to be without merit or more properly the subject of a separate proceeding.^[FN5]

This Decision constitutes the Order of this Court.