In a recent ruling, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York upheld a disciplinary decision against inmate Alex Devaughn. The court confirmed that Devaughn violated prison rules by possessing a weapon. This ruling is significant as it reinforces the authority of prison officials to maintain safety and security within correctional facilities.

The case, titled Matter of Devaughn v. Malark, was filed under docket number CV-25-1848 on November 5, 2026. The decision affects not only Devaughn but also the broader inmate population, as it highlights the consequences of violating prison regulations.

Background

Alex Devaughn is an inmate at Attica Correctional Facility. He was involved in a disciplinary proceeding initiated by the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS). The dispute arose when a correction officer observed a folding ceramic razor-type weapon fall from Devaughn's side while he was being escorted back from a medical evaluation. The officer confiscated the weapon, leading to charges against Devaughn for smuggling, possessing a weapon, and possessing contraband.

After the incident, a tier III disciplinary hearing was conducted to address the charges against Devaughn. During the hearing, he requested to have another incarcerated individual represent him. However, the Hearing Officer removed the representative after determining that Devaughn was acting in a way that suggested he wanted to represent himself. Ultimately, Devaughn was found guilty of smuggling and possessing a weapon but was not found guilty of possessing contraband. Following the hearing, Devaughn sought to challenge the decision through a CPLR article 78 proceeding.

The Ruling

The Appellate Division reviewed the case and confirmed the determination made by the Hearing Officer. The court stated, "The misbehavior report, hearing testimony, video footage and other documentary evidence provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt." This ruling indicates that the evidence presented during the hearing was sufficient to justify the findings against Devaughn.

The judges involved in the ruling included Garry, P.J., Pritzker, Fisher, Mackey, and Corcoran. They also addressed Devaughn's claims regarding the removal of his hearing representative, stating that the Hearing Officer acted appropriately. The court noted, "the charged individual will not be permitted to participate in the hearing as co-counsel." This emphasizes the rules surrounding representation during disciplinary hearings in correctional facilities.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for inmates and the operations of correctional facilities. It reinforces the authority of prison officials to enforce disciplinary rules and maintain order within the institution. The decision serves as a reminder to inmates about the serious consequences of possessing contraband and weapons while incarcerated.

Moreover, the court's decision may influence how future disciplinary hearings are conducted, particularly regarding the representation of inmates. It clarifies the expectations for inmate behavior during hearings and the limits on their ability to participate in their defense. This ruling could set a precedent for similar cases involving disciplinary actions within New York's correctional system.

What's Next

Devaughn has the option to appeal this ruling to a higher court if he chooses. However, details regarding any related cases or pending appeals were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case may also impact other inmates facing similar disciplinary charges.