SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1164-18T4

LARRY FLEMING,

Appellant,

v.

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

___________________________

Submitted November 4, 2019 – Decided

Before Judges Sabatino and Geiger.

On appeal from the New Jersey Department of 

Corrections.

Larry Fleming, appellant pro se.

Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for 

respondent (Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney 

General, of counsel; Stephanie Renee Dugger, Deputy 

Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the 

internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

November 13, 2019
2

A-1164-18T4

Larry Fleming, an inmate at Trenton State Prison, appeals a final agency 

decision of the Department of Corrections denying his claim to be paid $27.88 

for the cost of a banned magazine the prison confiscated. We affirm.

The record shows the magazine was ordered and paid for by another 

individual, with instructions to deliver it to Fleming at the prison. In the 

meantime, the magazine was added to the prison's running list of banned 

publications. The prison intercepted the package and returned the magazine to 

the seller.

Fleming then filed a claim to be paid for the cost of the magazine pursuant 

to N.J.A.C. 10A:2-6.2(5). The prison committee that handles such property 

claims unanimously denied the claim. Two of the members noted on the 

handwritten form that Fleming failed to supply a receipt for the magazine. 

Fleming tried to tender one after the ruling, but it was denied as too late. The 

PayPal receipt does not show payment by Fleming but instead by another person.

The inmate property claim regulations, N.J.A.C. 10A:2-6.2, list as a 

pertinent factor in item 5 "whether sufficient information has been supplied by 

the inmate, including proper receipts, witnesses, and investigative reports." 

Here the receipt was tendered too late.
3

A-1164-18T4

The Department has "broad discretionary powers" to promulgate 

regulations concerning activities inside correctional facilities. Jenkins v. 

Fauver, 108 N.J. 239, 252 (1987). On appeal, our courts generally will not 

disturb the Department's administrative decisions unless the inmate 

demonstrates that the decision is arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable, or that 

the record lacks substantial, credible evidence to support that decision. Henry 

v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571, 579-80 (1980); Figueroa v. N.J. Dep't of 

Corr., 414 N.J. Super. 186, 190 (App. Div. 2010).

Applying our limited scope of review and the deference owed to the 

Department, we affirm its determination. The decision to reject appellant's 

property damage claim was not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. It was 

not obligated to reconsider its decision based on the inmate's late submission. 

Moreover, the evidential value of the receipt is undermined by appellant's 

inmate trust account statement for the pertinent time frame, which reflects no 

payment out of his account in the sum of $27.88.

Affirmed.