Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Robert GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.
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, a prison inmate, was found guilty of drug use after two EMIT tests yielded positive results for the presence of opiates. Contrary to petitioner's contention, the two positive test results provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see, Matter of Lahey v. Kelly, 71 N.Y.2d 135, 524 N.Y.S.2d 30, 518 N.E.2d 924; Matter of Morales v. Coughlin, 188 A.D.2d 780, 591 N.Y.S.2d 814). While petitioner also argues that the proper testing procedures were not followed, we reject that claim. Based upon our review of the record, the evidence sufficiently demonstrated that the drug testing was performed in accordance with applicable procedures and that the chain of custody was adequately established (see, Matter of Selby v. Coombe, 249 A.D.2d 597, 670 N.Y.S.2d 637). Although petitioner contends that heroin remains in the system well over a week, this raised a credibility issue properly resolved by the Hearing Officer (see, Matter of Juzwa v. Goord, 264 A.D.2d 920, 695 N.Y.S.2d 627).
In addition, we find no merit to petitioner's claim that the Hearing Officer was biased. The fact that the Hearing Officer presided over two separate hearings involving petitioner does not, without more, indicate bias (see, Matter of Ford v. Senkowski, 257 A.D.2d 833, 682 N.Y.S.2d 640). Petitioner has failed to set forth any evidence establishing that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the outcome of the hearing flowed from the alleged bias (see, id.). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim that he was not allowed to question a correction officer, are either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 15, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)