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: Efrain MUNIZ, Petitioner, v. Donald SELSKY, as Director of Special Housing/Inmate Disciplinary Programs, 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 the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
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, 734 N.Y.S.2d 908). 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, 685 N.Y.S.2d 136; see also Matter of Taylor v. Taylor, 290 A.D.2d 778, 736 N.Y.S.2d 202). 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, 664 N.Y.S.2d 167; Matter of Benton v. Coombe, 242 A.D.2d 763, 662 N.Y.S.2d 276). The remaining contentions raised by petitioner have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
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: January 09, 2003
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)