| Matter of Williams v Fischer |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 04336 [84 AD3d 1661] |
| May 26, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Demetrius Williams, Petitioner, v Brian Fischer, asCommissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent. |
—[*1] Eric T. Schneiderman, 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 Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitionerguilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with refusing direct orders, making threats,engaging in violent conduct and harassment after an incident in which he threw his identificationcard at a correction officer, became verbally abusive, threatened to assault the officer and thenrefused to return to his cube when ordered to do so. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing,petitioner was found guilty of all charges. After the determination was upheld on administrativeappeal, this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. The misbehavior report, supporting documentation and testimony of the officerinvolved in the incident and several confidential inmate witnesses provide substantial evidence tosupport the determination (see Matter ofBallou v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 80 AD3d 1058, 1058-1059[2011]; Matter of Elliott v Fischer,73 AD3d 1366, 1366-1367 [2010]). Contrary to petitioner's contention, although the HearingOfficer did not interview the confidential informants personally, his inquiry of the correctionofficer who received the information was sufficient to confirm its veracity (see Matter ofBallou v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 80 AD3d at 1059; Matter of Mitchell v Bezio, 69 AD3d1281, [*2]1281 [2010]). To the extent that the various reportscontained slightly differing versions of the events that gave rise to the misbehavior report, andpetitioner's inmate witnesses provided testimony to support his contrary version of events, thispresented credibility issues to be resolved by the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Piper v Bezio, 81 AD3d1049, 1050 [2011]; Matter of Ballou v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs.,80 AD3d at 1059). Finally, our review reveals that the determination of guilt was based upon theevidence presented at the hearing, rather than any alleged bias (see Matter of Mitchell v Fischer, 81AD3d 1013, 1014 [2011]; Matter ofAnthony v Fischer, 81 AD3d 1027, 1028 [2011]).
We have examined petitioner's remaining claims and find them to be either unpreserved orwithout merit.
Spain, J.P., Rose, Lahtinen, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Adjudged that thedetermination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.