Mitchell v. BezioMitchell v. Bezio
We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the hearing testimony and the confidential testimony heard by the Hearing Officer in camera, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of McFarlane v Fischer, 65 AD3d 769, 770 [2009]). Contrary to petitioner‘s contention, the record demonstrates that, although the Hearing Officer did not independently interview the confidential informants, he made adequate inquiries of the correction officers who received the information to ascertain its reliability (see Matter of Farrow v Prack, 57 AD3d 1065, 1065 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 704 [2009]). Although petitioner denied being involved in an altercation, this presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to
Cardona, P.J., Peters, Lahtinen, Kavanagh and Garry, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.