Opinion
June 12, 1997
The administrative finding that petitioner was properly subjected to drug testing on the basis of reasonable suspicion of drug use is amply supported by substantial evidence ( see, Matter of Canty v. Spooner, 216 A.D.2d 463). The information supplied by an informant, which was corroborated by other events that investigators observed, provided a basis for reasonable suspicion sufficient to order that the petitioner be tested.
The Commissioner could rationally credit the testimony concerning a mistake in the transcription of the numbers for the urine samples ( see, Matter of Bonilla v. Kelly, 213 A.D.2d 264). Absent other evidence to prove a flawed chain of custody for such samples, petitioner failed to meet her burden of proof ( see, Matter of Newton v. Coughlin, 211 A.D.2d 936). As a result, there is no reason to disturb the determination, which is based on the evidence in the record ( see, Matter of Torres v. Koehler, 168 A.D.2d 362).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Tom, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.