Opinion
April 9, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Washington County.
We reject petitioner's argument that expungement is necessary because the second extension granted for the hearing was invalid, as it was obtained after the first extension had expired (see, 7 NYCRR 251-5.1). Initially, we note that petitioner was informed of the extension and the reason for it, which was to provide testimony requested by petitioner. Even if it was accepted that the grant was improper, in the absence of any substantive prejudice resulting from the minimum delay there is no reason to expunge (see, Matter of Rosado v Kuhlmann, 164 A.D.2d 199, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 806). Furthermore, the time limitations are not mandatory but are directory only (see, Matter of Taylor v Coughlin, 135 A.D.2d 992; but see, Matter of Hicks v Scully, 159 A.D.2d 624 ). Finally, the misbehavior reports, coupled with the hearing testimony of the correction officers who authored the reports and witnessed the events, provide substantial evidence to support the finding of guilt (see, Matter of Bernacet v Coughlin, 145 A.D.2d 802, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 603). Petitioner's contention that the charges were in retaliation for his filing a letter detailing alleged abuses by correction officers merely raised a question of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see, Matter of De Torres v Coughlin, 135 A.D.2d 1068, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 801). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.
Weiss, P.J., Yesawich Jr., Mahoney, Casey and Harvey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.