Opinion
June 30, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Clinton County.
A misbehavior report stated that petitioner was observed storming out of a hearing office, uttering obscenities to the Hearing Officer and slamming the door. He neither attended nor produced witnesses at his Tier II hearing which was conducted in his absence. The misbehavior report was read into the record and accepted as evidence. Petitioner was found guilty of verbal harassment and punishment was imposed. In this proceeding petitioner contends that he had transactional immunity, which entitled him to remain mute in response to the charge, and that the misbehavior report does not constitute substantial evidence of his guilt.
The misbehavior report, which was explicit and contemporaneous, provided substantial evidence for the Hearing Officer's determination finding petitioner guilty (see, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 N.Y.2d 615; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130; Matter of Gayle v LeFevre, 139 A.D.2d 866; Matter of Washington v Scully, 138 A.D.2d 874; Matter of Burgos v Coughlin, 108 A.D.2d 194, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 603). Petitioner's assertion that the Hearing Officer was biased finds no support in the record (see, Matter of Gayle v LeFevre, supra; see also, Matter of Aliym v Miles, 138 A.D.2d 833). Nor is there any connection with or merit to petitioner's argument that he was entitled to stand mute because he had transactional immunity in connection with an earlier shooting incident at the facility.
Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.