Vourderis v. SelskyVourderis v. Selsky
Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits the unauthorized use of a controlled substance after his urine twice tested positive for the presence of opiates. Initially, we reject petitioner’s assertion that the urinalysis request was not approved by a lieutenant until after petitioner provided a urine sample (see 7 NYCRR 1020.4 [b]). Any error with respect to the request for urine test form was adequately explained at the hearing and, in any event, “had no effect on the validity of the positive test results” (Matter of Samuel v Goord,
The misbehavior report, supporting documentation and testimony at the hearing provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of Lorino v Murphy,
Cardona, EJ., Crew III, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.