Filed Date: 10/26/2000
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
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 which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding chai
Furthermore, petitioner has failed to establish any prejudice resulting from the absence of a notation on the urinalysis test form that he was taking medications. Moreover, petitioner’s assertion that the medication he was taking caused false-positive results was fully explored and belied by the testimony of the correctional facility nurse and a representative of the SYVA corporation (see, Matter of Aviles v Selsky, 264 AD2d 883, 884; Matter of Hernandez v McGinnis, 251 AD2d 769). We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions, including that he was denied the right to call relevant witnesses and his claim of Hearing Officer bias, and find them to be either without merit or unpreserved for our review.
Cardona, P. J., Spain, Carpinello, Graffeo and Rose, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.