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: Pablo VALLECILLO, Petitioner, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Ulster County) to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
After observing what smelled like marihuana smoke coming from the cell of petitioner, an incarcerated individual, petitioner was pat-frisked and later searched, which led to the discovery of 9.2 grams of a green leafy substance, paper soaked in an unknown liquid and five blue pills with an M30 marking on them. An investigator identified the pills as those resembling Oxycodone, and, upon laboratory testing, it was determined that the pills contained fentanyl, an opiate. As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with drug possession and smuggling. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of the charges. Upon administrative review, the determination was affirmed, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.
We confirm. The misbehavior report and related documentation, including the positive test results, together with the hearing testimony, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of Robinson v. Annucci, 197 AD3d 1453, 1454 [3d Dept 2021]; Matter of Horton v. Annucci, 163 AD3d 1385, 1385 [3d Dept 2018]). Petitioner has also not demonstrated how the inclusion in the record of a May 2022 “evidence card,” which was not relied upon by the Hearing Officer in rendering the determination of guilt, prejudiced him in any way or otherwise affected the determination. Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim that he did not have adequate written notice of the rule prohibiting drug possession, are either unpreserved for our review or have been considered and found to be without merit.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ., concur.
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.
Docket No: CV–23–1571
Decided: June 13, 2024
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)