Opinion
April 11, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Ulster County.
Petitioner, a prison inmate who was found with a small packet of marihuana in his possession, challenges an administrative determination finding him guilty of possessing a controlled substance. Initially, we find that inasmuch as petitioner failed to raise his claim at the administrative hearing that he was denied the right to call a witness, he has not preserved this claim for review. We further find that the misbehavior report, combined with the testimony of the correction officers who found petitioner in possession of the controlled substance, provide substantial evidence supporting the administrative determination. Moreover, petitioner's exculpatory explanation for his possession of the marihuana merely presented a credibility question for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see, Matter of Perez v. Wilmot, 67 N.Y.2d 615, 616-617). Finally, although petitioner contends that there are deficiencies in the chain of custody, we find that the drug test request form and misbehavior report sufficiently established the chain of custody ( see, e.g., Matter of Torres v Selsky, 223 A.D.2d 889; Matter of Adorno v Coughlin, 216 A.D.2d 615). Therefore, the administrative determination must be confirmed
Mikoll, J.P., White, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.