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: Glenn E. ZINNAMON, Petitioner, v. Donald SELSKY, as Director of Special Housing and 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 two determinations of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
The detailed misbehavior reports and urinalysis test results indicating the presence of opiates and cocaine provide substantial evidence to support the determinations finding petitioner, a prison inmate, guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits the unauthorized use of controlled substances (see, Matter of Kreel v. Goord, 249 A.D.2d 600, 670 N.Y.S.2d 635, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 807, 678 N.Y.S.2d 593, 700 N.E.2d 1229). Contrary to petitioner's contention, the correction officer who conducted the urinalysis tests was qualified to do so. Although the correction officer had not yet received an actual certificate, testimony at the hearing established that he had successfully completed a training course in the use of the urinalysis testing apparatus (see, 7 NYCRR 1020.4[e][1] [iii]; see also, Matter of Townes v. Keane, 257 A.D.2d 873, 873-874, 685 N.Y.S.2d 132). Furthermore, we reject petitioner's assertion that destroying the urine specimens without providing him an opportunity to arrange for independent testing denied him the right to present a defense (see generally, Matter of Garcia v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 232 A.D.2d 697, 648 N.Y.S.2d 476). Petitioner's remaining contentions, including his challenge to the sufficiency of the hearing transcript, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
ADJUDGED that the determinations are confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: May 06, 1999
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)