From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Muniz v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 9, 2003
301 A.D.2d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

91967

January 9, 2003.

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

Efrain Muniz, Comstock, petitioner pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, Albany (Wayne L. Benjamin of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting the unauthorized possession of a controlled substance after his urine twice tested positive for the presence of opiates. Substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt was presented in the form of the detailed misbehavior report, the positive urinalysis test results and the hearing testimony of the correction officer who conducted the testing (see Matter of Bonaparte v. Goord, 289 A.D.2d 913). A typographical error on the misbehavior report showing an incorrect date and time for the collection of petitioner's urine sample was sufficiently explained by the reporting officer in his hearing testimony (see Matter of Rowe v. Goord, 257 A.D.2d 935; see also Matter of Taylor v. Taylor, 290 A.D.2d 778). The record establishes that the testing was conducted in reasonable compliance with all of the relevant regulatory procedures. Hence, the determination will not be disturbed (see Matter of Laraby v. Goord, 244 A.D.2d 690, 691; Matter of Benton v. Coombe, 242 A.D.2d 763). The remaining contentions raised by petitioner have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.

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


Summaries of

Muniz v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 9, 2003
301 A.D.2d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Muniz v. Selsky

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of EFRAIN MUNIZ, Petitioner, v. DONALD SELSKY, as Director…

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

Date published: Jan 9, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
753 N.Y.S.2d 575

Citing Cases

People v. Naughton

There was nothing illegal or improper. Despite Defendant's assertion to the contrary, it was not a…

Moreta v. Hamlin

Although this later report indicated December 3, 2002, as plaintiff's injury date, the court considers this…