Opinion
May 7, 1998
The written misbehavior report, together with petitioner's testimony wherein he admitted to striking a fellow inmate, provided substantial evidence to support the determination finding petitioner guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits inmates from engaging in violent conduct. We reject petitioner's contention that he was denied access to the evidence provided by the confidential informant given the Hearing Officer's determination that disclosure thereof would jeopardize the informants safety ( see, Matter of Morales v. Senkowski, 165 A.D.2d 393, 395-396). In any event, the Hearing Officer did not rely on the testimony of the confidential informant in rendering his decision. To the extent that petitioner claimed that he acted in self-defense, this created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see, Matter of Hardy v. Coombe, 234 A.D.2d 830). We have considered petitioners remaining contentions, including his claim of Hearing Officer bias, and find them to be unavailing.
Upon petitioner's administrative appeal, respondent modified the Hearing Officer's determination by, inter alia, dismissing the charge of assaulting an inmate.
Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.