Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kennon v. New Jersey Dep't of Corrections

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION


February 28, 2008

MARQIS KENNON, APPELLANT,
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT.

On appeal from the New Jersey Department of Corrections.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted February 6, 2008

Before Judges Cuff and Lisa.

Appellant, Marqis Kennon, a New Jersey State Prison inmate, appeals from a final decision of the Department of Corrections (DOC) denying his job application for the position of "Trenton Incarcerated Veterans Program (T.I.V.) balcony clerk." The Classification Committee denied the application because appellant was classified as a high risk inmate. His institutional record reflects that he is serving a life sentence with a thirty-year parole disqualifier for murder and other crimes, and that a detainer for escape has been lodged by another jurisdiction. The DOC contends that the balcony clerk position enables an inmate to travel throughout the institution with minimal supervision, and that such a position is not appropriate for a high risk inmate.

The regulation that guides decision making criteria for the Classification Committee provides in relevant part:

(a) Decisions on transfers and assignments to . . . work . . . programs . . . shall be made after consideration of the following factors:

16. History of escape, attempted escape or propensity for escape;

20. Needs of the correctional facility; and/or

21. Any other factor pertinent to the inmate's case.

[N.J.A.C. 10A:9-3.3.]

Accordingly, the Classification Committee appropriately considered appellant's high risk designation as a basis for denying his job application.

We will not interfere with an agency's decision unless it is arbitrary or capricious or unsupported by credible evidence in the record. Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571, 579- 80 (1980). From our review of the record, we are satisfied that the DOC's determination here was a reasonable one and supported by credible evidence in the record. Appellant's arguments do not warrant further discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D) and (E).

Affirmed.

20080228

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.