RONALD ENDICOTT v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-0

RONALD ENDICOTT,

Appellant,

v.

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

______________________________________________________

October 13, 2015

Submitted October 6, 2015 Decided

Before Judges Rothstadt and Currier.

On appeal from the New Jersey Department of Corrections.

Ronald Endicott, appellant pro se.

John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Lisa A. Puglisi, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Adam Robert Gibbons, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Ronald Endicott, an inmate incarcerated at the Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center in Avenel (ADTC), appeals from the Department of Corrections' (DOC) August 13, 2014 final administrative decision adjudicating him guilty of institutional infraction *.005, threatening another with bodily harm or with any offense against his or her person or his or her property. N.J.A.C. 10A:4-4.1(a). He argues his adjudication should be set aside because he "was not properly charged" and an institutional mental health professional "created a conflict of interest" when she reported a threat Endicott made, during a group therapy session, to "fight" a corrections officer when he got back to his unit.

Having considered appellant's arguments in light of the record and controlling law, we find them to be without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). The DOC's decision is supported by sufficient credible evidence on the record as a whole, R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D), and is not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571, 580 (1980). Appellant was afforded the process due an inmate in disciplinary proceedings. See McDonald v. Pinchak, 139 N.J. 188, 195 (1995); Avant v. Clifford, 67 N.J. 496, 522-33 (1975).

Affirmed.