Matter of Jones v. Venettozzi, 2017 NY Slip Op 6125 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). · Go Syfert
Matter of Jones v. Venettozzi, 2017 NY Slip Op 6125 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Razor v. Venettozzi (nyappdiv, 2021-12-02)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Razor v. Venettozzi
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Accordingly, "substantial evidence does not support the determination that the substance was unauthorized and, therefore, contraband" ( Matter of McCaskell v Rodriguez , 148 AD3d 1407, 1408 [2017]; see Matter of Truman v Venettozzi , 156 AD3d at 975 ; cf. Matter of Jones v Venettozzi , 153 AD3d 1073, 1073 [2017]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Cordova v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner's contention, a test identifying the strips was not required given the testimony at the hearing that petitioner, while being escorted for a strip search by correction facility staff, admitted that the strips were buprenorphine ( see Matter of Jones v Venettozzi , 153 AD3d 1073, 1073 [2017]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Schuler (Lasership, Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
"A case may be reopened following a default upon a showing of good cause if such request is made within a reasonable time" ( Matter of Browne [Nassau BOCES-Commissioner of Labor] , 153 AD3d 1073, 1074 [2017] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see 12 NYCRR 461.8; Matter of Barto [Commissioner of Labor] , 110 AD3d 1418 , 1419 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Zion (Commissioner of Labor)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
"A case may be reopened following a default upon a showing of good cause if such request is made within a reasonable time" ( Matter of Browne [Nassau BOCES-Commissioner of Labor] , 153 AD3d 1073, 1074 [2017] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see 12 NYCRR 461.8; Matter of Barto [Commissioner of Labor] , 110 AD3d 1418 , 1419 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Duchnowski v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
Although petitioner denied that the green leafy substance was synthetic marihuana, this presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve ( see Matter of Guzman v Annucci , 156 AD3d 1069, 1070 [2017]; Matter of Jones v Venettozzi , 153 AD3d 1073, 1073 [2017]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Love v. Venettozzi
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Inasmuch as the prohibition of contraband hinges on whether or not the item is authorized ( see 7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xiii]), and the substance here was not adequately identified, substantial evidence does not support a finding that the substance was unauthorized and, therefore, contraband ( see Matter of Truman v Venettozzi , 156 AD3d 974, 975 [2017]; Matter of McCaskell v Rodriguez , 148 AD3d 1407, 1408 [2017]; cf. Matter of Jones v Venettozzi , 153 AD3d 1073, 1073 [2017]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Christopher Jones, Petitioner,
v.
Donald Venettozzi, as Acting Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent
523984.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Aug 10, 2017.
2017 NY Slip Op 6125
Peters, Egan, Clark, Mulvey, Pritzker.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published

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 Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of possessing contraband. * The misbehavior report and testimony at the hearing, which related that a brown or green leafy substance was found in petitioner’s locker and that petitioner admitted that the substance was synthetic marihuana, provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, no positive testing identifying the substance was required given the admission by petitioner regarding the nature of the substance as set forth in the misbehavior report and as testified to at the hearing (see Matter of Burt v Annucci, 131 AD3d 751, 752 [2015]; cf. Matter of McCaskell v Rodriguez, 148 AD3d 1407, 1408 [2017]). To the extent that petitioner denies making such an admission and contends that the substance was leaves from a plant, these presented credibility issues for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Austin v Annucci, 145 AD3d 1263, 1264 [2016]; Matter of Oliver v Fischer, 107 AD3d 1268, 1269 [2013]). Petitioner’s remaining contention has been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Peters, P.J., Egan Jr., Clark, Mulvey and Pritzker, JJ., concur.

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

*

The misbehavior report also charged petitioner with possessing an intoxicant, but that charge, inexplicably, was not addressed at the hearing.