Opinion
No. CV-23-1571
06-13-2024
In the Matter of Pablo Vallecillo, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. Annucci, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
Pablo Vallecillo, Wallkill, petitioner pro se. Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.
Calendar Date:May 24, 2024
Pablo Vallecillo, Wallkill, petitioner pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Ulster County) to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
After observing what smelled like marihuana smoke coming from the cell of petitioner, an incarcerated individual, petitioner was pat-frisked and later searched, which led to the discovery of 9.2 grams of a green leafy substance, paper soaked in an unknown liquid and five blue pills with an M30 marking on them. An investigator identified the pills as those resembling Oxycodone, and, upon laboratory testing, it was determined that the pills contained fentanyl, an opiate. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with drug possession and smuggling. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of the charges. Upon administrative review, the determination was affirmed, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. The misbehavior report and related documentation, including the positive test results, together with the hearing testimony, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Robinson v Annucci, 197 A.D.3d 1453, 1454 [3d Dept 2021]; Matter of Horton v Annucci, 163 A.D.3d 1385, 1385 [3d Dept 2018]). Petitioner has also not demonstrated how the inclusion in the record of a May 2022 "evidence card," which was not relied upon by the Hearing Officer in rendering the determination of guilt, prejudiced him in any way or otherwise affected the determination. Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim that he did not have adequate written notice of the rule prohibiting drug possession, are either unpreserved for our review or have been considered and found to be without merit.
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ., concur.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.