From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

David v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 21, 2001
284 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Decided and Entered: June 21, 2001.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Allen David, Malone, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), Albany, for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules that prohibit the unauthorized use of a controlled substance and violating temporary release program rules after his urine sample twice tested positive for the presence of cocaine upon his return from temporary release. Contrary to petitioner's assertion, the record establishes that a proper foundation was set for the introduction of the urinalysis test results and that the correction officers who conducted the urinalysis reasonably complied with the testing procedures. The request for urinalysis form and testimony received at the hearing reveals that the chain of custody was sufficiently documented (see, Matter of Acosta v. Bennett, 273 A.D.2d 678). Furthermore, a review of the record documents, including the calibration rates, together with the testimony of the correction officer who performed the second urinalysis test refute petitioner's challenge to the reliability of the test results. We also reject petitioner's assertion of Hearing Officer bias despite petitioner's claim that he was precluded from asking questions during the hearing (see generally, Matter of Gonzalez v. Goord, 272 A.D.2d 797 appeal dismissed, lv dismissed 96 N.Y.2d 728; Matter of Omaro v. Goord, 269 A.D.2d 629). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

David v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 21, 2001
284 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

David v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ALLEN DAVID, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jun 21, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
726 N.Y.S.2d 590

Citing Cases

Mays v. Early

Contrary to petitioner's contention, a review of the record establishes that the determination of guilt…