Carbuccia v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Carbuccia v. Goord

298 A.D.2d 801, 748 N.Y.S.2d 709, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10352

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 31, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 298 A.D.2d 801 (Carbuccia v. Goord) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carbuccia v. Goord, 298 A.D.2d 801, 748 N.Y.S.2d 709, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10352 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

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.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits inmates from unauthorized use of a controlled substance after his urine sample twice tested positive for the presence of opiates. Although petitioner claims that the results of the urinalysis were invalid due to an error in calculating the cut-off rate and use of different reagents, a review of the hearing testimony and urinalysis testing documentation establishes that the appropriate testing procedures were followed (see 7 NYCRR 1020.4 [e]; see also Matter of Morales v Selsky, 281 AD2d 658, lv denied 96 NY2d [802]*802713; Matter of Selby v Coombe, 249 AD2d 597). We also reject petitioner’s contention that the hearing transcript was altered and find that any alleged gaps do not preclude meaningful appellate review (see Matter of Rucano v Goord, 264 AD2d 888). Petitioner’s remaining contention of Hearing Officer bias has been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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.

Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits inmates from unauthorized use of a controlled substance after his urine sample twice tested positive for the presence of opiates. Although petitioner claims that the results of the urinalysis were invalid due to an error in calculating the cut-off rate and use of different reagents, a review of the hearing testimony and urinalysis testing documentation establishes that the appropriate testing procedures were followed (see 7 NYCRR 1020.4 [e]; see also Matter of Morales v Selsky, 281 AD2d 658, lv denied 96 NY2d [802]*802713; Matter of Selby v Coombe, 249 AD2d 597). We also reject petitioner’s contention that the hearing transcript was altered and find that any alleged gaps do not preclude meaningful appellate review (see Matter of Rucano v Goord, 264 AD2d 888). Petitioner’s remaining contention of Hearing Officer bias has been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 A.D.2d 801, 748 N.Y.S.2d 709, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carbuccia-v-goord-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack