Opinion
91932
Calendar Date: May 14, 2003.
June 12, 2003.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review two determinations which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Eddie Ortiz, Dannemora, petitioner pro se.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Wayne L. Benjamin of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Carpinello, Mugglin and Kane, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges determinations arising out of two prison disciplinary hearings, the first of which found him guilty of refusing to obey direct orders and creating a disturbance. According to the misbehavior report, petitioner repeatedly refused to comply with the correction officer's orders to stop shouting and continued to create a disturbance until after 2:00 A.M. Petitioner had been counseled concerning similar conduct in the past. Substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt was presented at his tier II disciplinary hearing in the form of the detailed misbehavior report, written by the correction officer who issued the orders in question (see Matter of Filsaime v. Sabourin, 288 A.D.2d 516, 517; Matter of Dexter v. Goord, 257 A.D.2d 936).
In the second determination, petitioner was found guilty of refusing to obey a direct order and interference with a facility employee. The misbehavior report related that petitioner had been watching an altercation between two other inmates. When correction officers attempted to restore order, petitioner refused to obey their repeated directives to turn his back and grab the bars. Substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt was presented at his tier III disciplinary hearing in the form of the misbehavior report, the testimony of the correction officer who wrote the report after issuing the orders which petitioner had ignored and the testimony of a correction sergeant that petitioner had not only refused to obey his similar orders, but had responded to them with laughter (see Matter of Duran v. Senkowski, 289 A.D.2d 906, 907; Matter of Johnson v. Selsky, 271 A.D.2d 770, 770-771 [2000], lv dismissed, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 918). Petitioner's assertions that his procedural rights were violated at his disciplinary hearings and that the results thereof flowed from hearing officer bias have been examined and found to be without merit.
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Carpinello, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur.
ADJUDGED that the determinations are confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.