From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Slide v. Capra

Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 12, 2024
2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 6267 (N.Y. App. Div. 2024)

Opinion

No. CV-23-2248

12-12-2024

In the Matter of Teraine Slide, Petitioner, v. Michael Capra, as Superintendent of Sing Sing Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Teraine Slide, Ossining, petitioner pro se. Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondents.


Calendar Date: November 8, 2024

Teraine Slide, Ossining, petitioner pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Ceresia, McShan and Mackey, JJ.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Superintendent of Sing Sing Correctional Facility finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with drug use after the urine sample he was directed to provide tested positive for the use of cannabinoid. At the ensuing tier II disciplinary hearing, petitioner pleaded guilty to the charge, admitting that he used marihuana. Petitioner attempted twice to administratively appeal the decision but received no response. Ultimately, petitioner filed a grievance seeking a response to his appeals. The grievance investigation determined that the first appeal was not received but the second appeal was received and the decision was affirmed. This proceeding ensued.

We confirm. Petitioner is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the drug charge, i.e., the validity of the drug test, inasmuch as he pleaded guilty to using marihuana (see Matter of Mena v Gutwein, 216 A.D.3d 1384, 1385 [3d Dept 2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 906 [2023]; Matter of Davis v Annucci, 210 A.D.3d 1166, 1168 [3d Dept 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 910 [2023]; Matter of Medina v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision, 205 A.D.3d 1192, 1193 [3d Dept 2022]). Petitioner's contention that the tier II disciplinary hearing was not completed in a timely manner is belied by the record. Petitioner's remaining contentions are either unpreserved or without merit.

Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Ceresia, McShan and Mackey, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Slide v. Capra

Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 12, 2024
2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 6267 (N.Y. App. Div. 2024)
Case details for

Slide v. Capra

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Teraine Slide, Petitioner, v. Michael Capra, as…

Court:Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Dec 12, 2024

Citations

2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 6267 (N.Y. App. Div. 2024)