Gomez v. FischerGomez v. Fischer
We confirm. The misbehavior report, testimony of the correction officer who conducted the investigation and confidential information provide substantial evidence to support the determination (see Matter of Williams v Fischer, 84 AD3d 1661, 1662 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 711 [2011]; Matter of Phipps v Fischer, 82 AD3d 1396, 1397 [2011]). Petitioner‘s claim that he could not be found guilty because the fight never occurred is unavailing, inasmuch as a conspiracy to violate a rule may be punished to the same degree as an actual violation (see
Turning to petitioner‘s procedural contentions, we do not find that the misbehavior report was deficient due to its omission of specific dates and times and the identities of petitioner‘s coconspirators inasmuch as the report was the result of an ongoing investigation and was based upon confidential information (see Matter of Boyd v Fischer, 74 AD3d 1679, 1679-1680 [2010]; Matter of Taylor v Fischer, 74 AD3d 1677, 1677 [2010]). Petitioner‘s claim that he was denied documentary evidence in
We have examined petitioner‘s remaining contentions and have found them to be either unpreserved for our review or without merit.
Spain, J.P., Malone Jr., Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.