Opinion
December 10, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Chemung County (Ellison, J.).
Petitioner's only argument on this appeal is that two positive results from EMIT drug tests could not serve as substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt absent a confirmatory test of the specimen using a gas chromatography/mass spectrometry drug test. The Court of Appeals has recently held, however, that positive results in two EMIT drug tests constitute substantial evidence of guilt of the use of a controlled substance (see, Matter of Lahey v Kelly, 71 N.Y.2d 135).
Weiss, P.J., Levine, Crew III, Mahoney and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.