Matter of Williams v Fischer
2010 NY Slip Op 05834 [75 AD3d 706]
July 1, 2010
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, September 1, 2010


In the Matter of Daniel Williams, Petitioner, v Brian Fischer, asCommissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[*1]Daniel Williams, Pine City, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Frank Brady of counsel), forrespondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the SupremeCourt, entered in Chemung County) to review a determination of respondent which foundpetitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

After a correction officer received an anonymous note stating that an inmate had beenassaulted, further investigation led to petitioner, after which he was served with a misbehaviorreport charging him with assaulting an inmate and violent conduct. Following a tier IIIdisciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of both charges and his administrative appeal wasunsuccessful. Petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding. We confirm.The misbehavior report, the hearing testimony and the confidential testimony and documentsreviewed by the Hearing Officer in camera provide substantial evidence to support thedetermination of guilt (see Matter ofMitchell v Bezio, 69 AD3d 1281, 1281-1282 [2010]; Matter of McFarlane v Fischer, 65AD3d 769, 770 [2009]). Although the Hearing Officer did not interview the confidentialinformant personally, we find that his inquiry of the correction officer who received theinformation was adequate to determine its reliability (see Matter of Mitchell v Bezio, 69AD3d at 1281; Matter of Vassell vFischer, 48 AD3d 876 [2008]). Petitioner's denials that he was involved in the incidentraised a credibility question to be determined by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Benvenutti v Fischer, 67AD3d 1105 [2009]). Finally, there is no indication from our review of the record that theHearing Officer was biased, or that the [*2]determination flowedfrom anything other than the evidence presented against petitioner (see Matter of Quartieri v New York StateDept. of Correctional Servs., 70 AD3d 1071, 1072 [2010]).

Mercure, J.P., Rose, Kavanagh, Garry and Egan 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.