From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Lacy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 31, 1994
202 A.D.2d 931 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 31, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Franklin County.


Following a Superintendent's hearing, petitioner, an inmate at Bare Hill Correctional Facility in Franklin County, was found guilty of violating two prison disciplinary rules: rule 113.12 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [iii] [inmate shall not make, possess, use, sell or exchange any narcotic or controlled substance]) and rule 114.10 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [15] [i] [inmate shall not smuggle or attempt to smuggle or solicit others to smuggle any item in or out of the facility]). The evidence supporting respondents' determination was derived from the misbehavior report, petitioner's testimony, and in camera testimony, which showed that petitioner placed a call to an investigator and made arrangements for the investigator to pay petitioner's sister $500 for a quantity of heroin and that, subsequently, in the facility's parking lot, the investigator did purchase 17 bags of heroin from petitioner's cousin who thereafter was arrested inside the facility with three bags of heroin that he was attempting to smuggle to petitioner. Given the fact that petitioner admitted that he knew that the transaction between his cousin and the investigator involved illegal drugs, we find that respondents' determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of McCleary v. Mitchell, 188 A.D.2d 728; Matter of Chikeles v. LeFevre, 183 A.D.2d 1081).

Petitioner pleaded guilty to violating rule 103.20 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [4] [ii] [soliciting]).

We note that 7 N.Y.CRR part 1010, relied upon by petitioner, does not mandate the use of drug test documentation at a disciplinary hearing because this information is required only if respondents wish to introduce a positive test result (see, 7 NYCRR 1010.5). Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Crew III and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

Jackson v. Lacy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 31, 1994
202 A.D.2d 931 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Jackson v. Lacy

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of WALLACE JACKSON, Petitioner, v. PETER J. LACY, as…

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

Date published: Mar 31, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 931 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
610 N.Y.S.2d 95

Citing Cases

Matter of Minton v. Goord

At the hearing, petitioner admitted, and his sister confirmed, that he had solicited his sister to bring…

Matter of McGoey v. Selsky

In addition, we find no merit to petitioner's claims that he cannot be found guilty of violating the rule…