From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rashid v. Coombe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 30, 1997
239 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 30, 1997

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Doerr, Balio and Fallon, JJ.


Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The determination that petitioner violated inmate rule 113.12 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2[B][14] [iii]) by possessing an opiate is supported by substantial evidence (see, People ex rel. Vega v. Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130, 139). Although the SYVA test manual indicates that an ingredient in the cough syrup medication taken by petitioner "could" cause a false positive result, hearsay evidence provided by facility medical personnel and the toxicology laboratory utilized by respondent establish that petitioner did not ingest enough of the cough syrup to cause a false positive result. Further, the record does not support the contention that the Hearing Officer improperly considered petitioner's previous drug violations as evidence of guilt of the instant offense (cf., Matter of Lonski v Coughlin, 126 A.D.2d 981, 982). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.)


Summaries of

Rashid v. Coombe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 30, 1997
239 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Rashid v. Coombe

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of UMAR RASHID, Petitioner, v. PHILIP COOMBE, JR., as Acting…

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

Date published: May 30, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
661 N.Y.S.2d 816

Citing Cases

Matter of James v. Herbert [4th Dept 1999

Memorandum: The determination that petitioner violated inmate rule 113.24 ( 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xv]) is…