| Matter of Williams v Dubray |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09877 [57 AD3d 1185] |
| December 18, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Aaron Williams, Petitioner, v Keith Dubray, as Directorof Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent. |
—[*1] Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), forrespondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court,entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Serviceswhich found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
A confidential investigation revealed that, as part of gang activity, petitioner and another inmateordered a third inmate to attack that inmate's cellmate. As a result, petitioner was charged in amisbehavior report with violating the prison disciplinary rules prohibiting unauthorized organizationalactivity, assault and violent conduct. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guiltyof all charges. Petitioner exhausted his administrative remedies and then commenced this CPLR article78 proceeding seeking annulment.
We confirm. To the extent that petitioner contends that there is insufficient evidence to support thedetermination of guilt, we find that the determination is supported by substantial evidence including thetestimony adduced at the hearing, as well as extensive confidential information and testimonyconsidered by the Hearing Officer in camera (see Matter of Vassell v Fischer, 48 AD3d 876, 876 [2008]). Alsowithout merit is petitioner's claim of hearing officer bias. "The fact that the Hearing Officer presidedover another hearing involving the same incident does not establish bias where, as here, the recorddemonstrates that the Hearing Officer [*2]relied only on the proofpresented at petitioner's hearing" (Matter of Serrano v Goord, 266 AD2d 661, 662 [1999],lv denied 94 NY2d 762 [2000] [citation omitted]). Moreover, there is no indication in therecord that the determination at issue flowed from any purported bias (see id.).
We have examined petitioner's remaining contentions and, to the extent preserved, find them to beunavailing.
Peters, J.P., Spain, Lahtinen, Kavanagh and Stein, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination isconfirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.