McKoy v. Bezio

67 A.D.3d 1232, 890 N.Y.S.2d 131
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 19, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 67 A.D.3d 1232 (McKoy v. Bezio) 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
McKoy v. Bezio, 67 A.D.3d 1232, 890 N.Y.S.2d 131 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

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 the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with failing to follow a direct order, verbal harassment and possession of contraband. The charges stemmed from the circumstances surrounding a search of petitioner’s cell, which uncovered bags containing a green leafy substance—subsequently testing positive for marihuana—hidden under petitioner’s blanket in the cuff of his robe and in a cigar wrapper. Petitioner was found guilty of all charges following a tier III disciplinary hearing. This determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, prompting petitioner to commence this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, multiple tests on the substances recovered did not have to be performed to confirm the initial positive NIK test results (see Matter of Grochulski v Selsky, 305 AD2d 823, 823 [2003]; Matter of Cliff v Kingsley, 293 AD2d 954, 954 [2002]; Matter of Darnell v Kuhlmann, 145 AD2d 852, 853 [1988]). To the extent that petitioner raises the issue of substantial evidence, we conclude that the misbehavior report, positive test results and the hearing testimony were sufficient to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Shepherd v Fischer, 63 AD3d 1473, 1473 [2009]; Matter of Hall v Selsky, 52 AD3d 1078, 1078 [2008]).

Mercure, J.P., Rose, Kane, Kavanagh and Garry, 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

Related

Staine v. Fischer
111 A.D.3d 999 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Fero v. Prack
108 A.D.3d 1004 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 A.D.3d 1232, 890 N.Y.S.2d 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckoy-v-bezio-nyappdiv-2009.