Jackson v. Lacy
This text of 202 A.D.2d 931 (Jackson v. Lacy) 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.
Opinion
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Franklin County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Following a Superintendent’s hearing, petitioner, an inmate at Bare Hill Correctional Facility in Franklin County, was found guilty of violating two prison disciplinary rules: rule 113.12 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [iii] [inmate shall not make, possess, use, sell or exchange any narcotic or controlled substance]) and rule 114.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [15] [i] [inmate shall not smuggle or attempt to smuggle or solicit others to [932]*932smuggle any item in or out of the facility]).
We note that 7 NYCRR part 1010, relied upon by petitioner, does not mandate the use of drug test documentation at a disciplinary hearing because this information is required only if respondents wish to introduce a positive test result (see, 7 NYCRR 1010.5). Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
Petitioner pleaded guilty to violating rule 103.20 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [4] [ii] [soliciting]).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
202 A.D.2d 931, 610 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-lacy-nyappdiv-1994.