Judgment unanimously vacated, on the law, determination confirmed, and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The court erred by failing to transfer the substantial evidence question to this court (CPLR 7804 [g]). We have considered this question as if properly transferred (Matter of Lahey v. Kelly, 125 A.D.2d 923; Collana v. Perales, 123 A.D.2d 493).
The Hearing Officer was entitled to credit the charging officer's report even though the officer did not testify and his account differed from that of petitioner and two inmate witnesses (see, Matter of Perez v. Wilmot, 67 N.Y.2d 615; see also, People ex rel. Baptiste v. Smith, 115 A.D.2d 225). Since the report contained a detailed account of the events giving rise to the charges, the determination was supported by substantial evidence and must be confirmed.
There is no regulatory mandate that the Superintendent review a transcript or tape recording of the hearing on an administrative appeal (see, 7 NYCRR 253.8) and we cannot conclude that the failure to do so violates any due process rights since petitioner was afforded judicial review of the Hearing Officer's determination (Matter of Samuels v. LeFevre, 120 A.D.2d 894, 896).