IN RE: Keith WALLACE

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

IN RE: Keith WALLACE, Petitioner, v. Albert PRACK, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Decided: March 22, 2012

Before:  PETERS, J.P., ROSE, MALONE JR., McCARTHY and GARRY, JJ. Keith Wallace, Comstock, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

An inmate was found in his cell with cuts on his face and arm that appeared to have been inflicted with a razor-type weapon.   An investigation ensued, during which confidential information was obtained implicating petitioner as the perpetrator of the attack on the inmate.   As a result, he was charged in a misbehavior report with assaulting an inmate and possessing a weapon.   Petitioner was found guilty of the charges following a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal.   He then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

 We confirm.   The misbehavior report, together with the confidential information considered by the Hearing Officer, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Reynoso v. Fischer, 67 A.D.3d 1166, 887 N.Y.S.2d 879 [2009], appeal dismissed 14 N.Y.3d 767, 898 N.Y.S.2d 93, 925 N.E.2d 98 [2010];  Matter of Arnold v. Fischer, 60 A.D.3d 1177, 1177, 875 N.Y.S.2d 318 [2009] ).   Notwithstanding petitioner's assertion to the contrary, the Hearing Officer properly ascertained the reliability of the confidential informants through conducting personal interviews with these individuals in camera (see Matter of Perez v. Fischer, 89 A.D.3d 1310, 1311, 932 N.Y.S.2d 598 [2011];  Matter of Pisano v. Fischer, 87 A.D.3d 1247, 1248, 930 N.Y.S.2d 304 [2011] ).   Furthermore, we find that the misbehavior report was sufficiently detailed to give petitioner notice of the charges to enable him to prepare a defense (see Matter of Davis v. Fischer, 78 A.D.3d 1416, 910 N.Y.S.2d 599 [2010];  Matter of Arnold v. Fischer, 60 A.D.3d at 1177, 875 N.Y.S.2d 318).   Contrary to petitioner's claim, the hearing transcript does not contain gaps that are so significant as to preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Piper v. Bezio, 81 A.D.3d 1049, 1050, 916 N.Y.S.2d 319 [2011];  Matter of Anthony v. Fischer, 81 A.D.3d 1027, 1028, 916 N.Y.S.2d 280 [2011] ).   We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Copied to clipboard