Fleming v. GoordFleming v. Goord
As a result of an investigation during which petitioner‘s telephone calls were monitored, correction officers discovered
We confirm. Substantial evidence, consisting of the misbehavior report, transcribed telephone conversations, the visitor‘s incriminating statement and the investigator‘s testimony, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Antinuche v Goord, 16 AD3d 743, 744 [2005]). Petitioner‘s claim that the administrative reversal of the first determination has res judicata effect with respect to the determination at issue, thereby precluding the rehearing, was not raised at the hearing or in petitioner‘s administrative appeal and is not preserved for our review (see Matter of Ramos v Goord, 309 AD2d 1096, 1097 [2003]; see generally Matter of Huggins v Goord, 19 AD3d 989 [2005]). His remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit.
Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.