Opinion
November 13, 1998
Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Fallon, JJ.
Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The written misbehavior report, augmented by the testimony of the correction officer who authored it, constitutes substantial evidence to support the determination ( see, Matter of Bryant v. Coughlin, 77 N.Y.2d 642, 647; People ex rel. Vega v. Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130, 139). There is no support in the record for petitioner's contention that the misbehavior report was physically tampered with after it was received by the review officer and served on petitioner. In any event, petitioner failed to establish that he suffered any prejudice. :as a result of the alleged tampering ( see, Matter of Mosley v. Goord, 242 A.D.2d 906, 907). There also is no support in the record for petitioner's contention that the Hearing Officer was not impartial ( see, Matter of Ortiz v. Rourke, 241 A.D.2d 962, 963). Petitioner failed to object at the hearing to the Hearing Officer's alleged off-the-record investigation ( see, Matter of Bramble v. Mead, 242 A.D.2d 858, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 803). In any event, the Hearing Officer's brief reference to an extraneous fact had no bearing on petitioner's defense or the case against petitioner ( see, Matter of Collazo v. Coombe, 235 A.D.2d 654). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Orleans County, Punch, J.)