Grant v. Rock

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with possession of marihuana, smuggling and violating facility visitation procedures after he allegedly attempted to smuggle marihuana into a facility through the visit room. A correction officer observed a greasy substance on the back of petitioner’s pants and shirt in the visiting room; the resulting strip frisk revealed a greasy substance on his rectal area. Subsequently, petitioner’s visitors, who were seated at a table across from him, were asked to put their items in a bag. Upon searching the bagged items in the sergeant’s office, a balloon containing a green leafy substance was found. The substance tested positive for marihuana. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty as charged, although the penalty was reduced. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, testimony of the *1226investigating officers and related documentation, including the unusual incident report, drug test results and chain of evidence forms, provide substantial evidence to support the determination (see Matter of Curry v Fischer, 113 AD3d 981, 982 [2014]; Matter of Clark v Fischer, 111 AD3d 1045, 1045-1046 [2013]). Petitioner’s denial of the charges and testimony to the contrary presented credibility issues for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Rodriguez v Fischer, 120 AD3d 855, 855 [2014]). Moreover, his assertion that the Hearing Officer’s actions in providing him with documents that he requested constituted improper investigation of the charges against him is patently meritless; a Hearing Officer may cure deficiencies in employee assistance by providing requested documents at the hearing (see e.g. Matter of Lashway v Fischer, 117 AD3d 1141, 1142 [2014]). Nor did the Hearing Officer err in denying petitioner’s requested documents and witness testimony that were redundant or irrelevant (see Matter of Gourdine v Prack, 119 AD3d 1257, 1258 [2014]; Matter of Shepherd v Fischer, 111 AD3d 1213, 1213 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 864 [2014]). Petitioner’s remaining arguments have been considered and found to be lacking in merit.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.