Opinion
April 19, 1993
Adjudged that the determinations are confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.
The determinations were supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Sowa v Looney, 23 N.Y.2d 329; see also, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176). The petitioners' contention that they were prejudiced by the improper admission of photographs showing the complainant's injuries and the layout of the transit facility bathroom in which the assault occurred is without merit (see, People v Tejeda, 78 N.Y.2d 936; People v Cesare, 68 A.D.2d 938). Moreover, the hearsay testimony of the prisoner with whom the complainant shared a holding cell immediately after the assault was admissible in the context of this hearing (see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130).
According due deference to the determinations of the respondents, we find that the penalty imposed was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness (see, Matter of Dean v Del Castillo, 174 A.D.2d 566; Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222).
We have considered the petitioners' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Sullivan and Lawrence, JJ., concur.