Matter of Campbell v Bedard

Matter of Campbell v Bedard 2014 NY Slip Op 08705 Decided on December 11, 2014 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: December 11, 2014
518740

[*1]In the Matter of ERICK M. CAMPBELL, Petitioner,

v

COREY BEDARD, as Acting Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Calendar Date: October 21, 2014
Before: Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Egan Jr. and Devine, JJ.

Erick M. Campbell, Attica, petitioner pro se.

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

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 a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with drug use after his urine twice tested positive for buprenorphine. Petitioner pleaded guilty to the charge with the explanation that he has a severe drug problem. At the conclusion of the tier III disciplinary hearing, the Hearing Officer found petitioner guilty as charged. Following an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. Given petitioner's plea of guilty with an explanation, he is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of

the evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Fields v Prack, 120 AD3d 1510 [2014]; Matter of Robinson v Prack, 119 AD3d 1309, 1309 [2014]). To the extent that petitioner contends that he was incompetent to adequately participate in the hearing, the confidential testimony establishes that the Hearing Officer properly considered petitioner's mental health status and ability to participate in the hearing (see Matter of Lashway v Fischer, 110 AD3d 1420, 1420 [2013]; Matter of Sabino v Prack, 101 AD3d 1202, 1203 [2012]). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and are either unpersuasive or unpreserved for our review.

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Egan Jr. and Devine, JJ., concur.

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