| Matter of Sterling v Bezio |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 06749 [76 AD3d 1165] |
| September 30, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Julian Sterling, Petitioner, v Norman R. Bezio, asDirector of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs,Respondent. |
—[*1] Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Sania W. Khan 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.
After an inmate was slashed with a razor in the prison yard, a confidential informantidentified petitioner as a participant in the gang-related incident. Petitioner was thereafter servedwith a misbehavior report charging him with multiple disciplinary infractions. After petitionerwas escorted to the special housing unit, a search of his cell revealed a razor with the blademissing and he was served a second misbehavior report charging him with possession of analtered item. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of violentconduct, assault on an inmate, possession of a weapon, threats, gang activity and possession of analtered item. That determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, prompting petitioner tocommence this CPLR article 78 proceeding.
We confirm. The detailed misbehavior reports, the hearing and confidential testimony of thecorrection officers who investigated the incident and searched petitioner's cell and theconfidential memorandum provide substantial evidence to support the determination ofpetitioner's guilt (see Matter of Norris vFischer, 71 AD3d 1211, 1212 [2010]; Matter of Nova v [*2]Selsky, 54 AD3d453, 454 [2008]). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the Hearing Officer was able toindependently assess the reliability of the confidential information through his questioning of thecorrection officer who obtained the information from two confidential informants (see Matter of Hill v Fischer, 69 AD3d1103, 1103 [2010]; Matter of Oterov Fischer, 54 AD3d 1082 [2008]).
Petitioner's remaining contentions have been examined and are either unpreserved or lackingin merit.
Peters, J.P., Rose, Kavanagh, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that thedetermination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.