Matter of Ramos v Selsky
2008 NY Slip Op 01266 [48 AD3d 863]
February 14, 2008
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, April 16, 2008


In the Matter of Wilfrido Ramos, Petitioner, v Donald Selsky, asDirector of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs,Respondent.

[*1]Wilfrido Ramos, Comstock, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), forrespondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the SupremeCourt, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of CorrectionalServices which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with making threats and attempting to assaultan inmate after a confidential informant revealed that petitioner threatened to stab him if he didnot stab another inmate. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty ascharged, and that determination was affirmed upon administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report and the hearing testimony provide substantial evidenceto support the determination of guilt (seeMatter of Witkowski v Goord, 45 AD3d 1068, 1069 [2007]; Matter of Lewis v Goord, 43 AD3d1259 [2007]). The contrary testimony of petitioner and his witnesses created a credibilityissue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Smith v Goord, 45 AD3d 1119 [2007]; Matter of Griffin v Goord, 43 AD3d591, 591 [2007]). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the Hearing Officer was not required toconduct an in camera assessment of the confidential informant's credibility inasmuch as he wasable to assess it when the informant testified at the hearing (see Matter of Hines v Goord,29 AD3d [*2]1204, 1205 [2006]; see also Matter of Vallade v Goord, 11AD3d 786, 787 [2004]).

To the extent that they were preserved, petitioner's remaining contentions have beenreviewed and determined to be without merit.

Peters, J.P., Spain, Rose, Lahtinen and Malone Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that thedetermination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.