MATTER OF ANDERSON v. MORROW

Petitioner, a prison inmate, challenges the determination finding him guilty of possessing a controlled substance on two separate occasions. Supreme Court determined that the Hearing Officer afforded petitioner his due process rights and, subsequently, dismissed the petition. We affirm. Petitioner's conditional right to call witnesses was not abridged since his potential witnesses' testimony was not relevant as it did not relate to petitioner's innocence or serve to mitigate his guilt (see, Matter of Konigsberg v. Selsky, 255 A.D.2d 702). Accordingly, the record, reviewed as a whole, shows that petitioner was afforded his due process rights and, therefore, his remaining contentions are without merit.

CARDONA, P.J., CREW III, SPAIN, GRAFFEO and MUGGLIN, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.