Based upon information received from a confidential source, petitioner, a prison inmate, was requested to submit a urine sample. Petitioner was found guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule that prohibits inmates from using unauthorized controlled substances after two urinalysis tests yielded positive results for the presence of opiates. 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 Selby v. Coombe, 249 A.D.2d 597). 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 Mitchell v. Selsky, 252 A.D.2d 639, 640). We have examined petitioner's remaining contentions, including his claim of Hearing Officer bias and challenge to the sufficiency of the misbehavior report, and find them to be without merit.
Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Peters, Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.