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: Mohammad MOHAMMAD, Petitioner, v. Glenn S. GOORD, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.
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 which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with using drugs after a sample of his urine twice tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids. He was found guilty of this charge following a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
Based upon our review of the record, we find that the misbehavior report, the positive urinalysis test results and related documentation, as well as the testimony at the hearing, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Van Dusen v. Selsky, 14 A.D.3d 979, 980, 788 N.Y.S.2d 625 [2005]; Matter of McCorkle v. Bennett, 8 A.D.3d 918, 919, 779 N.Y.S.2d 623 [2004] ). Petitioner's defense that medications he was taking caused a false positive reading was refuted by the testimony of the technical assistant employed by the manufacturer of the testing equipment. Furthermore, although the lieutenant who authorized the test failed to sign the request for urinalysis form as required (see 7 NYCRR 1020.4[b] ), he testified that this was an oversight, he remembered authorizing the test and he signed the form at the hearing, thus curing any defect (see e.g. Matter of Dalton v. Selsky, 6 A.D.3d 844, 845, 773 N.Y.S.2d 912 [2004] ). In any event, petitioner failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by this error (see Matter of Sabater v. Selsky, 4 A.D.3d 705, 706, 772 N.Y.S.2d 733 [2004] ). Therefore, we find no reason to disturb respondent's determination.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
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 09, 2005
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)