Lozada v. FischerLozada v. Fischer
We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the correspondence intercepted through the mail watch and the hearing testimony, provide substantial evidence to support the determination (see Matter of Knight v McGinnis, 14 AD3d 984 [2005]). Contrary to petitioner‘s contention, the written authorization for the mail watch signed by the facility Superintendent satisfied the requirements of
Mercure, J.P., Peters, Lahtinen, Kane and Garry, JJ., concur.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.