From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Weatherly v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 6, 2000
268 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

January 6, 2000

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

Richard Weatherly, Auburn, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Peter G. Crary of counsel), Albany, for respondents.

Before: CARDONA, P.J., CREW III, SPAIN, CARPINELLO and MUGGLIN, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits inmates from using controlled substances, after two EMIT tests performed on petitioner's urine sample yielded positive results for the presence of cannabinoids. In our view, the misbehavior report, combined with the testimony of the correction officer who performed the tests and authored the misbehavior report, constitute substantial evidence supporting the charge of drug use (see, Matter of Kussius v. Walker, 247 A.D.2d 911, 912). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the chain of custody was sufficiently demonstrated and a proper foundation was laid for the reliance on the positive test results. The reporting correction officer responded to petitioner's questions relating to the timing of the tests and the Hearing Officer was entitled to credit his testimony (see, Matter of Gonzalez v. Selsky, 253 A.D.2d 940). With respect to petitioner's argument that he was improperly denied documentary evidence, we find that the Hearing Officer fully explored petitioner's claims and properly found that the requested material was either irrelevant or unavailable due to security concerns (see, Matter of Johnson v. Selsky, 257 A.D.2d 874;Matter of Fletcher v. Murphy, 249 A.D.2d 638). Finally, we have examined petitioner's contention that the Hearing Officer was biased and find it to be wholly unsupported by the record.

CARDONA, P.J., CREW III, SPAIN, CARPINELLO and MUGGLIN, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Matter of Weatherly v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 6, 2000
268 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Weatherly v. Goord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RICHARD WEATHERLY, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Jan 6, 2000

Citations

268 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
701 N.Y.S.2d 674

Citing Cases

Matter of Perez v. Goord

s and knew his urine sample would test positive, together with the detailed misbehavior report, the positive…

Matter of Cliff v. Carpenter

We also reject petitioner's contentions that he was denied a fair and impartial hearing and that his guilt…