From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Muniz v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

July 20, 2000.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Canfield, J.), entered August 17, 1999 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Tomas Muniz, Stormville, appellant in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Gina M. Ciccone of counsel), Albany, for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits the unauthorized use of a controlled substance. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the error of transcribing an incorrect test number from the correctional facility's administrative log book to the calibration slip does not, under the circumstances here, constitute reversible error (see, Matter of Russo v. Selsky, 249 A.D.2d 738, 739; Matter of Saldana v. Coombe, 241 A.D.2d 584). This inadvertent error was subsequently clarified by the testimony of the correction officer who performed the test and recorded the information. Notwithstanding this error, the record establishes that the results of petitioner's urine sample, accurately identified by his department identification number, twice tested positive for the presence of opiates.

We also reject petitioner's assertion that the malfunctioning of the tape recorder requires reversal, especially where, as here, the Hearing Officer recalled a witness and attempted to reconstruct the record (see generally, Matter of McDonald v. Coughlin, 217 A.D.2d 770, 771). Finally, a review of the record fails to support petitioner's assertion of Hearing Officer bias.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Muniz v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Muniz v. Selsky

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF TOMAS MUNIZ, Appellant, v. DONALD SELSKY, as Director of…

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

Date published: Jul 20, 2000

Citations

274 A.D.2d 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
711 N.Y.S.2d 577

Citing Cases

Matter of Samuel v. Goord

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of…

In the Matter of Rivera v. Goord

The calibration printout submitted and read into the record by the testing officer contained the inmate…