Opinion
May 23, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [Lewis Friedman, J.].
The Commissioner's determination that petitioner ingested cocaine is supported by substantial evidence, including the results of the standard EMIT drug test as confirmed by the standard GCMS test, and the testimony of the laboratory director describing the procedures used to ensure the chain of custody and reliability of the test results ( Matter of Fulton v. Jacobson, 226 A.D.2d 215). There is no merit to petitioner's claim that such testimony was mere speculation as to what transpired with respect to his urine specimen, and that the testimony of those who actually handled the specimen and performed the tests was needed to provide substantial evidence of ingestion ( see, People ex rel. Vega v. Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130, 139; Matter of Grossman v Kralik, 217 A.D.2d 625). The penalty of dismissal does not shock our sense of fairness ( Matter of Fulton v. Jacobson, supra).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Rubin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.