| Matter of Benson v Brown |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 03841 [84 AD3d 794] |
| May 3, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Eric Benson, Petitioner, v Dawson Brown,Respondent. |
—[*1] Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and CarolFischer of counsel), for respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent DawsonBrown, Acting Superintendent of Sing Sing Correctional Facility, dated March 24, 2009, whichconfirmed a determination of a hearing officer, dated February 18, 2009, made after a tier IIdisciplinary hearing, that the petitioner was guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules, andimposed a penalty.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements, the petition isdenied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.
"A prison disciplinary determination made as a result of a hearing at which evidence wastaken pursuant to direction by law must be supported by substantial evidence" (Matter of Adamson v Barto, 37 AD3d597, 598 [2007]; see CPLR 7803 [4]; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d130, 139 [1985]). Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the misbehavior report, the hearingtestimony, and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, constituted substantial evidenceto support the hearing officer's determination that he was guilty of the charges brought againsthim (see Matter of Costantino vGoord, 38 AD3d 659, 661 [2007]; Matter of Gilzene v McGinnis, 300 AD2d658 [2002]). The issues of credibility were resolved by the hearing officer, and we find no basisupon which to disturb the hearing officer's determination (see Matter of Gilzene vMcGinnis, 300 AD2d at 659).
The petitioner's contention that he was improperly denied the right to call a particular witnessis unpreserved for judicial review and, in any event, without merit. Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Halland Cohen, JJ., concur.