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: Derrick HOOVER, 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.
After a correction officer observed petitioner acting in an unusual manner, petitioner was ordered to take a drug test. When a sample of his urine twice tested positive for opiates, he was charged in a misbehavior report with using a controlled substance. Petitioner was found guilty of the charge following a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal with a modified penalty. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the positive urinalysis test results and related documentation as well as the testimony adduced at the hearing, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Molina v. Selsky, 21 A.D.3d 1238, 1238-1239, 801 N.Y.S.2d 425 [2005]; Matter of Paige v. Goord, 19 A.D.3d 908, 908, 797 N.Y.S.2d 180 [2005] ). Petitioner's claim that the correction officer who administered the drug test altered the result in retaliation for the dismissal of a prior drug charge presented an issue of credibility for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Silverstein v. Selsky, 32 A.D.3d 1100, 1100, 821 N.Y.S.2d 301 [2006] ). Moreover, there is nothing in the record to substantiate petitioner's claim of hearing officer bias or to establish that the determination flowed from any such bias (see Matter of Boatwright v. McGinnis, 24 A.D.3d 1136, 1137, 807 N.Y.S.2d 189 [2005] ). Petitioner's remaining contentions, to the extent they are properly before us, are unavailing.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: March 15, 2007
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)