Respondent's determination that petitioner violated a condition of his parole by resisting arrest is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (Executive Law § 259-i [f] [viii]). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the police had probable cause to believe that petitioner had committed a crime when they apprehended him, such that the arrest was lawful ( People v Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181, 185). We have reviewed petitioner's other claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Wallach, J.P., Ross, Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.