Opinion
February 27, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Clinton County.
Contrary to petitioner's contention, his disciplinary hearing was commenced within seven days of his confinement as required by 7 NYCRR 251-5.1 (a). There was also no error in adjourning the hearing so that petitioner could meet with his employee assistant (see, Matter of Agosto v. Coughlin, 153 A.D.2d 1008, 1009) or in extending the hearing due to the unavailability of the Hearing Officer. We have previously held that where, as here, delay was authorized and reasonable and resulted in no prejudice to petitioner, there is no basis to annul a determination of guilt (see, Matter of Taylor v Coughlin, 135 A.D.2d 992, 993). In any event, petitioner failed to object to either the adjournment or the extension, thereby waiving any claim of error in this regard (see, Matter of Hop Wah v. Coughlin, 153 A.D.2d 999, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 705). Petitioner's other claims of procedural error have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit. Finally, we find that the misbehavior report, coupled with petitioner's own testimony as to his actions toward the correction officer who authored the report, constitutes substantial evidence to support the determination (see, People ex rel. Vega v. Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130, 139-140; Matter of Johnson v. Coughlin, 157 A.D.2d 991, 992).
Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Crew III and Mahoney, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.