Sheils v. GoordSheils v. Goord
Petitioner became disruptive, used profanities and refused to comply with a correction officer‘s directives while being
We confirm. The misbehavior report, the testimony of the correction officers who witnessed the incident, as well as petitioner‘s own admissions, constitute substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of McFadden v Armmitage, 1 AD3d 670, 670 [2003]; Matter of Saunders v La Bombard, 257 AD2d 840, 840 [1999]). Contrary to petitioner‘s claim, the record reveals that the Hearing Officer did consider evidence of petitioner‘s mental status in making his determination. Petitioner‘s remaining contentions have either not been preserved for our review, have been abandoned or are lacking in merit.
Mercure, J.P., Peters, Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.