Opinion
June 11, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County.
Petitioner contends that the determination is not supported by substantial evidence as he was improperly charged with possession of weapons and the Hearing Officer failed to make his own assessment of the confidential informant's credibility. We find, however, that the specificity and detail of the confidential information, given to the Hearing Officer during an in camera interview of the informant, allowed the Hearing Officer to make his own credibility assessment (see, Matter of Moore v. Coughlin, 170 A.D.2d 723, 724; Matter of McClean v LeFevre, 142 A.D.2d 911, 912). Contrary to petitioner's contention, therefore, the Hearing Officer did not rely on a third party's assessment of the informant's credibility (cf., Matter of Wynter v. Jones, 135 A.D.2d 1032, 1033). During this same in camera testimony, the informant stated that he definitely saw petitioner in possession of knives, thus providing substantial evidence to support the possession charge (see, Matter of Diaz v Coughlin, 134 A.D.2d 668, 669). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them either meritless or unpreserved for our review (see, Matter of Lebron v. Coughlin, 169 A.D.2d 859, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 852; Matter of McClean v LeFevre, supra, at 912; Matter of Law v. Racette, 120 A.D.2d 846, 848).
Weiss, P.J., Levine, Mercure, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.