Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition for habeas corpus relief. Petitioner argued that his parole was revoked illegally because it was inappropriate for the Board of Parole to rely solely on the Hearing Officer's report and recommendation without reviewing the verbatim record of the revocation hearing. There is no such requirement in State law or regulation and due process of law does not mandate such review (see, Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471; Yaretsky v. Blum, 629 F.2d 817 [2d Cir], revd on other grounds 457 U.S. 991; Matter of Melvin v. Kelly, 126 A.D.2d 956, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 609; cf., People ex rel. Knowles v. Smith, 54 N.Y.2d 259, 266). All that is required is that the Board's decision to revoke parole "be based upon the hearing officer's finding of fact and recommendation and such other information as the panel may deem necessary" ( 9 NYCRR 8005.20 [d]). That was done here (see, People ex rel. Smith v. Mantello, 167 A.D.2d 912).