Robinson v. SelskyRobinson v. Selsky
We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the letter and petitioner’s admission that he authored the letter, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Alston v Goord, 25 AD3d 852, 852 [2006]; Matter of Jones v Department of Correctional Servs. of State of N.Y., 283 AD2d 805, 805 [2001]). Petitioner’s assertion that the letter was misinterpreted presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Alston v Goord, supra at 852; Matter of McFadden v Armmitage, 1 AD3d 670, 670-671 [2003]). His claim of Hearing Officer bias has not been preserved for our review.
Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.