MATTER OF BRADSTREET v. GOORD

Substantial evidence supports the determination of respondent finding petitioner, a prison inmate, guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule which prohibits the unauthorized use of a controlled substance. The misbehavior report, together with the positive results of two urinalysis tests indicating the presence of cannabinoids and the testimony of the correction officer who performed one of the urinalysis tests, amply support the determination of petitioner's guilt (see, Matter of Mitchell v. Selsky, 252 A.D.2d 639; Matter of Lorusso v. Goord, 248 A.D.2d 771). Furthermore, because the determination of petitioner's guilt was not based upon the confidential information which prompted the request for petitioner's urine sample, the Hearing Officer was not required to assess the credibility of the confidential informant (see, Matter of Rivera v. Goord, 258 A.D.2d 793; Matter of Mitchell v. Selsky, supra). Notwithstanding petitioner's contentions to the contrary, we find that the record demonstrates that the appropriate testing procedures were followed and that the chain of custody was sufficiently established (see,Matter of Frazier v. Goord, 251 A.D.2d 800, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 813). To the extent that petitioner's remaining contentions have been preserved for our review, we find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Mugglin, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.