gaps hearing in New York

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2014Finally, to the extent that claimant’s challenge to the completeness of the hearing transcript is properly before us, we conclude that “the gaps in the hearing transcript do not preclude meaningful review of the decision” (Matter of Mercure [Commissioner of Labor], 27 AD3d 857, 858 [2006]; see Matter of Schachtman [Commissioner of Labor], 286 AD2d 790, 791 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 607 [2001]).

2014Finally, to the extent that claimant’s challenge to the completeness of the hearing transcript is properly before us, we conclude that “the gaps in the hearing transcript do not preclude meaningful review of the decision” (Matter of Mercure [Commissioner of Labor], 27 AD3d 857, 858 [2006]; see Matter of Schachtman [Commissioner of Labor], 286 AD2d 790, 791 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 607 [2001]).

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017Inasmuch as petitioner failed to contend in his administrative appeal that the Hearing Officer improperly declined to admit a misbehavior report against another inmate in evidence, he did not exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to that contention, and we have no discretionary authority to reach it (see generally Matter of Sabino v Hulihan, 105 AD3d 1426, 1426 [2013]).

2017Inasmuch as petitioner failed to contend in his administrative appeal that the Hearing Officer improperly declined to admit a misbehavior report against another inmate in evidence, he did not exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to that contention, and we have no discretionary authority to reach it (see generally Matter of Sabino v Hulihan, 105 AD3d 1426, 1426 [2013]).

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2017We reject petitioner’s remaining contentions. “[T]he record does not establish that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from the alleged bias” (Matter of Trapani v Annucci, 117 AD3d 1473, 1474 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Barnes v Annucci, 140 AD3d 1779, 1779 [2016]), the gaps in the hearing transcript “do not preclude meaningful review of petitioner’s contentions” (Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick, 59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. Matter of Baez v Bezio, 77 AD3d 745, 746 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 752 [2011

2016Contrary to the father’s further contention, petitioner mother was not required to provide a written record detailing the missed child support payments, and her unequivocal testimony that the father failed to pay any child support from October 1995 to December 2004 is sufficient (cf. Matter of Cox v Cox, 181 AD2d 201, 204-205 [1992]).

2016Contrary to the father’s further contention, petitioner mother was not required to provide a written record detailing the missed child support payments, and her unequivocal testimony that the father failed to pay any child support from October 1995 to December 2004 is sufficient (cf. Matter of Cox v Cox, 181 AD2d 201, 204-205 [1992]).

2015Furthermore, upon reviewing the record, we do not find that the gaps in the hearing transcript preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Merritt v Fischer, 108 AD3d 993, 994-995 [2013]; Matter of Bookman v Fischer, 107 AD3d 1260, 1260 [2013]).

2015Furthermore, upon reviewing the record, we do not find that the gaps in the hearing transcript preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Merritt v Fischer, 108 AD3d 993, 994-995 [2013]; Matter of Bookman v Fischer, 107 AD3d 1260, 1260 [2013]).

2015Furthermore, upon reviewing the record, we do not find that the gaps in the hearing transcript preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Merritt v Fischer, 108 AD3d 993, 994-995 [2013]; Matter of Bookman v Fischer, 107 AD3d 1260, 1260 [2013]).

2015Furthermore, upon reviewing the record, we do not find that the gaps in the hearing transcript preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Merritt v Fischer, 108 AD3d 993, 994-995 [2013]; Matter of Bookman v Fischer, 107 AD3d 1260, 1260 [2013]).

2014Finally, to the extent that claimant’s challenge to the completeness of the hearing transcript is properly before us, we conclude that “the gaps in the hearing transcript do not preclude meaningful review of the decision” (Matter of Mercure [Commissioner of Labor], 27 AD3d 857, 858 [2006]; see Matter of Schachtman [Commissioner of Labor], 286 AD2d 790, 791 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 607 [2001]).

2014Finally, to the extent that claimant’s challenge to the completeness of the hearing transcript is properly before us, we conclude that “the gaps in the hearing transcript do not preclude meaningful review of the decision” (Matter of Mercure [Commissioner of Labor], 27 AD3d 857, 858 [2006]; see Matter of Schachtman [Commissioner of Labor], 286 AD2d 790, 791 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 607 [2001]).

2012Initially, upon reviewing the record, we do not find that the minor gaps in the hearing tape or transcript preclude meaningful review (see Matter of Machicote v Bezio, 87 AD3d 763, 764 [2011]; Matter of Smith v Martuscello, 85 AD3d 1516, 1516 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 715 [2011]).

2011Turning to petitioner’s procedural contentions, we do not find the minor gaps in the hearing transcript to be so substantial as to prevent meaningful judicial review (see Matter of Smith v Martuscello, 85 AD3d 1516, 1516 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 715 [2011]; Matter of Montgomery v Fischer, 84 AD3d 1666, 1667 [2011]).

2012To that end, the misbehavior report and testimony at the hearing, including that of the author of the misbehavior report who investigated the incident and testified that petitioner admitted during an interview * that one of his family members left the tobacco for him, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Borcsok v Selsky, 296 AD2d 678, 678-679 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 616 [2002]), notwithstanding that there is evidence to support a contrary conclusion.

2012To that end, the misbehavior report and testimony at the hearing, including that of the author of the misbehavior report who investigated the incident and testified that petitioner admitted during an interview * that one of his family members left the tobacco for him, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Borcsok v Selsky, 296 AD2d 678, 678-679 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 616 [2002]), notwithstanding that there is evidence to support a contrary conclusion.

2020Initially, contrary to the father's contention, the gaps in the hearing transcript caused by inaudible portions of the audio tape recording "are not so significant as to preclude meaningful review of the order" ( Matter of Bibbes-Turner v Bibbes , 174 AD3d 1506 , 1507 [4th Dept 2019]; see Matter of Savage v Cota , 66 AD3d 1491, 1492 [4th Dept 2009]).

2020Contrary to the father's further contention, the record provides no basis for concluding that Supreme Court deprived him of due process by directing that the same interpreter be used for both parties ( see generally 22 NYCRR 217.1 [a]; People v Robles , 72 AD3d 1520, 1521 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 777 [2010]; People v Rivera , 298 AD2d 120, 120 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 563 [2002]).

2020Contrary to the father's further contention, the record provides no basis for concluding that Supreme Court deprived him of due process by directing that the same interpreter be used for both parties ( see generally 22 NYCRR 217.1 [a]; People v Robles , 72 AD3d 1520, 1521 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 777 [2010]; People v Rivera , 298 AD2d 120, 120 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 563 [2002]).

2019Although respondent disagrees, we find that the significant gaps in the hearing transcript preclude meaningful appellate review of these issues ( see Matter of Thompson v Annucci , 162 AD3d 1365 , 1366 [2018]; Matter of Caldwell v Annucci , 140 AD3d 1248, 1248-1249 [2016]; Matter of Nance v Annucci , 132 AD3d 1198, 1198 [2015]).

2019Although respondent disagrees, we find that the significant gaps in the hearing transcript preclude meaningful appellate review of these issues ( see Matter of Thompson v Annucci , 162 AD3d 1365 , 1366 [2018]; Matter of Caldwell v Annucci , 140 AD3d 1248, 1248-1249 [2016]; Matter of Nance v Annucci , 132 AD3d 1198, 1198 [2015]).

2019Additionally, given that petitioner already has served his period of confinement in the special housing unit and more than two years has elapsed since the incident, "the equitable remedy of annulment and expungement of the . . . disciplinary determination is warranted" ( Matter of Vidal v Annucci , 149 AD3d 1366, 1368-1369 [2017], lv denied 30 NY3d 906 [2017]).

2018Further, contrary to petitioner's [*2]contention, the misbehavior report — which set forth the date and time of the telephone calls, as well as the results of the investigation and interview with his wife — was sufficiently detailed to provide him with adequate notice of the charges and an opportunity to prepare a defense ( see Matter of McDonald v Fischer , 93 AD3d 969, 969 [2012]).

2018Initially, we are unpersuaded by petitioner's contention that the gaps in the hearing transcript and telephone recordings are so significant as to preclude meaningful review ( see Matter of Legeros v Annucci , 147 AD3d 1175, 1176 [2017]).

2017Turning to the merits, we find that the misbehavior report, positive narcotics identification kit results and testimony at the hearing provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Kaid v Prack, 140 AD3d 1511, 1511 [2016]; Matter of Miller v Annucci, 131 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2015]).

2017Turning to the merits, we find that the misbehavior report, positive narcotics identification kit results and testimony at the hearing provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Kaid v Prack, 140 AD3d 1511, 1511 [2016]; Matter of Miller v Annucci, 131 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2015]).

2017Initially, we are unpersuaded by petitioner’s contention that meaningful review is precluded by the gaps in the hearing transcript (see Matter of Belle v Prack, 140 AD3d 1509, 1510 [2016]).