Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, in case of William Smith, No. 7747M.
Lester G. Nauhaus, Public Defender, with him, John H. Corbett, Jr., Chief-Appellate Division, Robert W. Beckwith, Appellate Counsel, for petitioner.
Arthur R. Thomas, Assistant Chief Counsel, with him, Robert A. Greevy, Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Craig and Palladino, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Palladino.
[ 116 Pa. Commw. Page 240]
William Smith (Petitioner) appeals from an October 2, 1987 decision of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Board) denying his request for administrative relief from his recommitment as a technical parole violator (TPV). We affirm.
On September 10, 1987 the Board recommitted Petitioner as a TPV for violating condition 5C of his parole -- assaultive behavior. Before this court, Petitioner contends the finding that he violated this condition is not supported by substantial evidence because it is based on a medical report, admitted over Petitioner's counsel's objection, without the requisite showing of "good cause."
We find it unnecessary to address Petitioner's contention because that is not the only evidence relied on by the Board in determining Petitioner had violated condition 5C, and the other evidence provides substantial support for a finding of assaultive behavior.
The Board stated, in its September 10, 1987 decision recommitting Petitioner, that it relied on the following evidence: "Direct testimony of Velinda Bradley, Officer Vaughn, Ilene Kirby, Patricia Wise,
[ 116 Pa. Commw. Page 241]
Gloria Vaughn and Rita Bradley. Copy of medical reports from treating physician." Velinda Bradley testified:
Ms. Bradley: He knocked me down hard. . . .
Mr. Tallon [parole agent]: How many times did ...