McKethan v. SelskyMcKethan v. Selsky
We confirm. Initially, although the hearing transcript contains some inaudible portions, they are not so significant as to preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Lewis v Goord, 43 AD3d 1223, 1224 [2007]). Turning to the merits, the detailed misbehavior report and the testimony adduced at the hearing comprise substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Tafari v Selsky, 45 AD3d 1139, 1139 [2007]). Finally, as for petitioner‘s conclusory claim that he was improperly denied the right to present photographic evidence, the Hearing Officer properly found it irrelevant to the charges (see Matter of Santana v Senkowski, 269 AD2d 638 [2000]).
Cardona, P.J., Peters, Rose, Kane and Malone Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.