From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Spulka v. Murphy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 26, 2000
276 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

October 26, 2000.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Kenneth Spulka, Malone, petitioner in person.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Patrick Barnett-Mulligan of counsel), Albany, for respondents.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Graffeo, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits possession of narcotics after two packets of a substance concealed inside his underwear tested positive for heroin. The misbehavior report, the testimony of its author, the positive results of a drug test performed on the substance and the testimony of the correction officer who conducted the test provide substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Burse v. Goord, 274 A.D.2d 678, 679, 710 N.Y.S.2d 201, 202; Matter of Archie v. Great Meadow Correctional Facility, 243 A.D.2d 808). The record reveals that proper testing procedures were adhered to and that the chain of custody was sufficiently established (see, 7 NYCRR 1010.4; see also, Matter of Harris v. Goord, 268 A.D.2d 933, 934; Matter of Juzwa v. Goord, 264 A.D.2d 920, 921). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the requirement that positive test results be confirmed by a second test applies only to the testing of urine specimens and not when the testing procedures are performed directly on the suspected substance (see, 7 NYCRR 1020.4 [e] [1] [iv]; 1010.4).

We have reviewed petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim of Hearing Officer bias, and conclude that they are either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.

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


Summaries of

Matter of Spulka v. Murphy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 26, 2000
276 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Spulka v. Murphy

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of KENNETH SPULKA, Petitioner, v. ROBERT J. MURPHY, as…

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

Date published: Oct 26, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 916

Citing Cases

Matos v. Goord

The second misbehavior report, submitted by the correction officer who conducted the laboratory testing on…

Martinez v. Selsky

Petitioner contends that a satisfactory chain of custody was never established regarding the confiscated…