From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conway v. Commissioner of Department of Correctional Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 14, 2000
278 A.D.2d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

December 14, 2000.

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

Twan Conway, Malone, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Julie M. Sheridan of counsel), Albany, for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules which prohibit the unauthorized use of a controlled substance after his urine sample twice tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids. Petitioner maintains that a combination of his medications could have resulted in a false positive result. Although petitioner claimed to be taking seven different medications, testimony from the facility nurse as well as a memorandum from the correction officer who tested the urine sample established that at the time petitioner's urine sample was obtained he was not taking any medication that would alter the results of the urinalysis test. Petitioner attempted to refute such testimony by producing a prescription bottle which still contained Pentasa pills, but this medication was not denoted on the SYVA list of medications which would cause a false positive for cannabinoids.

It is within the province of the Hearing Officer to resolve any credibility issues resulting from the conflicting testimony regarding medications that petitioner was taking at the time he submitted the urine sample (see, Matter of Filbert v. Goord, 267 A.D.2d 536; Matter of Rivera v. Goord, 261 A.D.2d 754, 755). The positive results of the urinalysis tests and the testimony received at the hearing provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see, Matter of Youngblood v. Goord, 267 A.D.2d 640, 641).

We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them either unpreserved for our review or without merit.

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


Summaries of

Conway v. Commissioner of Department of Correctional Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 14, 2000
278 A.D.2d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Conway v. Commissioner of Department of Correctional Services

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TWAN CONWAY, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE…

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

Date published: Dec 14, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
717 N.Y.S.2d 429

Citing Cases

Joseph v. Prack

We confirm. The misbehavior report, positive urinalysis test results, related documentation and testimony at…

In the Matter of Figueroa v. Goord

617). Contrary to petitioner's contentions, we find no infirmity in any of the documents with which…