IN RE: Eric A. MAGIN (2008)

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Zwack, J.), entered May 15, 2007 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a determination of respondent which found him guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.   Supreme Court dismissed the petition and petitioner now appeals.

 Petitioner's sole contention on appeal is that the misbehavior report was reviewed by a correction sergeant who was not properly authorized to act as a review officer and, as a result, the misbehavior report is invalid.¹  This claim is not properly preserved for our review as petitioner did not make an objection to the sergeant's authorization at the hearing (see Matter of Carter v. Goord, 45 A.D.3d 1077, 1078, 846 N.Y.S.2d 411 [2007];  Matter of Hernandez v. Goord, 37 A.D.3d 893, 894, 830 N.Y.S.2d 364 [2007];  see also Matter of Roman v. Goord, 11 A.D.3d 858, 859, 783 N.Y.S.2d 150 [2004] ).   In any event, although the facility superintendent is directed to designate as a review officer a staff member of the rank of lieutenant or higher, we perceive no impropriety in the designation here inasmuch as it is within the superintendent's discretion to designate “some other employee” (7 NYCRR 251-2.1;  see Matter of Wright v. Goord, 19 A.D.3d 855, 797 N.Y.S.2d 167 [2005], lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 711, 804 N.Y.S.2d 35, 837 N.E.2d 734 [2005] ).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Although petitioner raised other issues in his petition, which were addressed and dismissed by Supreme Court, he abandoned these claims by not raising them in his brief (see Matter of Coleman v. Goord, 39 A.D.3d 1048, 1048 n., 834 N.Y.S.2d 368 [2007] ).