| Matter of Williams v Selsky |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 03549 [50 AD3d 1426] |
| April 24, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Darren Williams, Petitioner, v Donald Selsky, asDirector of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs,Respondent. |
—[*1] Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet 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, a prison inmate, was charged in a misbehavior report with refusing a direct order,assaulting an officer, engaging in violent conduct and creating a disturbance. A tier IIIdisciplinary hearing was conducted, at the conclusion of which petitioner was found guilty of allcharges. That determination was administratively affirmed with a modified penalty and thisCPLR article 78 proceeding seeking annulment ensued.
We confirm. To the extent that the petition can be construed as raising a substantial evidencequestion, we find that the misbehavior report, related documentation and hearing testimonysatisfy that standard (see Matter ofGonzalez v Goord, 44 AD3d 1180, 1180 [2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 701[2008]). Petitioner's denial of the charges created a credibility issue for resolution by the HearingOfficer (see Matter of Wesolowski vDonahue, 45 AD3d 1224, 1224 [2007]), as did his claim that the misbehavior report wasfabricated and retaliatory in nature (seeMatter of Ryan v Goord, 12 AD3d 799, 799 [2004]). As for petitioner's assertion thatthe Hearing Officer was biased, it is neither substantiated in the record nor is there any indicationthat the determination at hand flowed from any purported bias (see Matter of McKinley vGoord, [*2]40 AD3d 1280, 1280 [2007], lv denied 9NY3d 807 [2007]). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claims that he was deniedthe right to present witness testimony and deprived of adequate employee assistance, have beenexamined and found to be unavailing.
Spain, J.P., Carpinello, Rose, Kavanagh and Stein, JJ., concur. Adjudged that thedetermination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.