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: Diogenes FILPO, 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.
As the result of a random pat-frisk, a substance suspected to be narcotics was found on petitioner's person. Petitioner ultimately was charged with violating a prison disciplinary rule that prohibits the possession of drugs. A tier III disciplinary hearing was held, after which petitioner was found guilty and a penalty was imposed. Following an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to overturn the determination.
We confirm. Petitioner contends that he was not randomly pat-frisked and, instead, was searched because of a “tip” from a confidential informant. However, it was not necessary for the Hearing Officer to determine the credibility of the informant; the finding of guilt was based upon evidence independent of any confidential information that may have triggered the initial investigation (see Matter of Garcia v. Goord, 308 A.D.2d 609, 610, 764 N.Y.S.2d 217 [2003] ).
Petitioner also contends that not all of the documentation necessary concerning the testing that was done on the suspected controlled substance was provided at the hearing or given to him (see 7 NYCRR 1010.5). However, the record reveals that, by failing to raise this issue at the hearing, it was not properly preserved for our review (see Matter of Campanale v. Coughlin, 214 A.D.2d 902, 903-904, 626 N.Y.S.2d 287 [1995] ). In any event, the misbehavior report stated that petitioner admitted that the substance found on his person was heroin. Petitioner's remaining arguments have been considered and rejected for lack of merit.
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: February 01, 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)