From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Al Blake v. Fischer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Aug 4, 2011
87 A.D.3d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

2011-08-4

In the Matter of Al BLAKE, Petitioner,v.Brian FISCHER, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.


Al Blake, Sonyea, petitioner pro se.Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

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 Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner submitted to a random urinalysis test. When his sample twice returned a positive result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with violating a prison disciplinary rule prohibiting drug use. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of the charge and this determination was upheld on administrative review. Petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

The misbehavior report, positive urinalysis test results and testimony of the correction officer who tested the sample provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt ( see Matter of Stanford v. Fischer, 77 A.D.3d 1013, 1013, 908 N.Y.S.2d 760 [2010]; Matter of Rampersant v. Fischer, 75 A.D.3d 1018, 1018, 907 N.Y.S.2d 527 [2010]; Matter of Odome v. Goord, 8 A.D.3d 921, 922, 779 N.Y.S.2d 603 [2004] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the chain of custody was adequately established through the request for urinalysis form and the testimony of the officers who collected and tested petitioner's sample ( see Matter of Stanford v. Fischer, 77 A.D.3d at 1013, 908 N.Y.S.2d 760; Matter of Odome v. Goord, 8 A.D.3d at 922, 779 N.Y.S.2d 603; Matter of Victor v. Goord, 309 A.D.2d 1026, 1027, 766 N.Y.S.2d 138 [2003] ). Inasmuch as the basis for the finding of misconduct is the positive test results on the sample and not its collection, we reject petitioner's argument that the misbehavior report was deficient because it was not endorsed by the officer who collected the sample ( see Matter of Lindo v. Fischer, 72 A.D.3d 1295, 1296, 903 N.Y.S.2d 543 [2010]; Matter of Devivo v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 306 A.D.2d 600, 600–601, 759 N.Y.S.2d 709 [2003], lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 515, 769 N.Y.S.2d 202, 801 N.E.2d 423 [2003] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been considered and found to be unpreserved or without merit.

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


Summaries of

In the Matter of Al Blake v. Fischer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Aug 4, 2011
87 A.D.3d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In the Matter of Al Blake v. Fischer

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Al BLAKE, Petitioner,v.Brian FISCHER, as Commissioner of…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Aug 4, 2011

Citations

87 A.D.3d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
927 N.Y.S.2d 811
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 6161