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: Edward SCHNITTKER, Petitioner, v. Donald P. 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 Washington 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 that prohibits the unauthorized use of controlled substances or narcotic drugs after his urine twice tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids. Substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt was presented at his disciplinary hearing in the form of the misbehavior report and the positive urinalysis test results with supporting documentation (see, Matter of Jackson v. Portuondo, 281 A.D.2d 740, 721 N.Y.S.2d 575; Matter of Bacchi v. Lacy, 267 A.D.2d 524, 698 N.Y.S.2d 920). In addition, testimony was given by an experienced technical representative employed by SYVA, the manufacturer of the urinalysis kit used to test petitioner's urine. She expressed her confidence in the reliability of the test and opined that the medications being taken by petitioner immediately prior to urinalysis testing would not have yielded false positive test results (see, Matter of Harris v. Goord, 273 A.D.2d 599, 710 N.Y.S.2d 550, lv. dismissed 95 N.Y.2d 917, 719 N.Y.S.2d 645, 742 N.E.2d 120). As there was substantial evidence of petitioner's guilt, the determination is confirmed (see, Matter of Baez v. Sabourin, 283 A.D.2d 749, 724 N.Y.S.2d 368). The remaining contentions raised herein, including petitioner's claim of Hearing Officer bias, 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: November 29, 2001
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)