Opinion
March 18, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County.
Petitioner was found guilty after a Superintendent's hearing of violating State-wide rules prohibiting rioting, threatening, violent conduct and possession of weapons as a result of his activities during an inmate uprising at Southport Correctional Facility in Chemung County. He now raises various arguments in contending that the determination must be annulled.
Initially, we reject petitioner's argument that the Hearing Officer was biased. Nothing in the record reveals evidence of bias or that the outcome of the hearing was affected by bias (see, Matter of Williams v. Coughlin, 190 A.D.2d 883; Matter of Nieves v. Coughlin, 157 A.D.2d 943, 944). The fact that the record indicates that the Hearing Officer spoke brusquely with petitioner in attempting to control him does not compel a different result (see, Matter of Afrika v. Edwards, 160 A.D.2d 1212). We also find no denial of petitioner's right to employee assistance. Petitioner was given an opportunity to choose an employee assistant and refused to select an assistant or to sign the assistance form (see, Matter of Dawes v. Coughlin, 176 A.D.2d 415, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 751; Matter of Aviles v. Scully, 154 A.D.2d 371).
Further, we do not find any denial of petitioner's right to submit evidence which requires annulment. Petitioner's defense was that he had experienced an epileptic seizure during the incident and could not have been involved. The only documents requested by petitioner were his medical records. The record reveals that the Hearing Officer reviewed these medical records and took official notice of petitioner's epileptic condition. A review of the medical records establish that they contain no indication that petitioner suffered a seizure during the incident in question, and no relevant information other than that of which the Hearing Officer took official notice. Given these circumstances, we find no prejudice to petitioner (see, Matter of Maldonado v. Coughlin, 186 A.D.2d 974; Matter of Cioci v Coughlin, 169 A.D.2d 895; Matter of Morales v. Senkowski, 165 A.D.2d 393; see also, Matter of Sanchez v. Irvin, 186 A.D.2d 996). Finally, we find that the Hearing Officer properly refused to call an inmate witness whose testimony would have been redundant (see, Matter of Sanchez v. Irvin, supra; Matter of Santiago v Hoke, 183 A.D.2d 978, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 757).
Weiss, P.J., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.