IN RE: Chauncey CROMWELL (2005)

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Donald Selsky, Director of Special Housing/ Inmate Disciplinary Programs of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, dated April 10, 2003, which affirmed a determination of a hearing officer dated February 6, 2003, made after a Tier III disciplinary hearing, finding the petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule (see 7 NYCRR 270.2[B][1][ii] ) and imposing a penalty.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

 Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the determination finding him guilty of assaulting a staff member is supported by substantial evidence in the record (see Matter of Larkins v. Selsky, 15 A.D.3d 488, 789 N.Y.S.2d 442;  cf. Matter of Bryant v. Coughlin, 77 N.Y.2d 642, 647, 569 N.Y.S.2d 582, 572 N.E.2d 23).  “In reviewing a prison disciplinary determination, the court's inquiry is limited to deciding whether the determination was supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Ramsey v. Phillips, 11 A.D.3d 470, 782 N.Y.S.2d 373, quoting Matter of Glover v. Goord, 262 A.D.2d 483, 484, 691 N.Y.S.2d 784).

“[A]n assault by an inmate need not cause or intend injury” (Matter of Hop Wah v. Coughlin, 162 A.D.2d 887, 888, 558 N.Y.S.2d 235) and “[i]t is not required that the victim suffer physical injury” (Matter of Mojica v. Goord, 262 A.D.2d 1002, 693 N.Y.S.2d 365, cert. denied 529 U.S. 1039, 120 S.Ct. 1536, 146 L.Ed.2d 350;  Matter of Hop Wah v. Coughlin, 160 A.D.2d 1054, 1056, 553 N.Y.S.2d 886).   Here, the challenged determination was supported by substantial evidence.