Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
23 New York opinions name it 6 courts 1973–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Drouingreen2 sentences2024The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had watery and bloodshot eyes; an "odor of marijuana on his clothes," and "ash containing marijuana on his pants"; that he admitted to the officer that he had "two puffs of marijuana" before the officer stopped him; and that defendant refused to take a urine test ( see People v Drouin , 115 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1019 [2014]; see also People v Cruz , 48 NY2d 419 [1979], appeal dismissed 446 US 901 [1980]). 2024The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had watery and bloodshot eyes; an "odor of marijuana on his clothes," and "ash containing marijuana on his pants"; that he admitted to the officer that he had "two puffs of marijuana" before the officer stopped him; and that defendant refused to take a urine test ( see People v Drouin , 115 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1019 [2014]; see also People v Cruz , 48 NY2d 419 [1979], appeal dismissed 446 US 901 [1980]). | 2 | 2 |
Waller v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2024The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had watery and bloodshot eyes; an "odor of marijuana on his clothes," and "ash containing marijuana on his pants"; that he admitted to the officer that he had "two puffs of marijuana" before the officer stopped him; and that defendant refused to take a urine test ( see People v Drouin , 115 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1019 [2014]; see also People v Cruz , 48 NY2d 419 [1979], appeal dismissed 446 US 901 [1980]). 2024The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had watery and bloodshot eyes; an "odor of marijuana on his clothes," and "ash containing marijuana on his pants"; that he admitted to the officer that he had "two puffs of marijuana" before the officer stopped him; and that defendant refused to take a urine test ( see People v Drouin , 115 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1019 [2014]; see also People v Cruz , 48 NY2d 419 [1979], appeal dismissed 446 US 901 [1980]). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Cruzgreen2 sentences2024The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had watery and bloodshot eyes; an "odor of marijuana on his clothes," and "ash containing marijuana on his pants"; that he admitted to the officer that he had "two puffs of marijuana" before the officer stopped him; and that defendant refused to take a urine test ( see People v Drouin , 115 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1019 [2014]; see also People v Cruz , 48 NY2d 419 [1979], appeal dismissed 446 US 901 [1980]). 2024The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had watery and bloodshot eyes; an "odor of marijuana on his clothes," and "ash containing marijuana on his pants"; that he admitted to the officer that he had "two puffs of marijuana" before the officer stopped him; and that defendant refused to take a urine test ( see People v Drouin , 115 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1019 [2014]; see also People v Cruz , 48 NY2d 419 [1979], appeal dismissed 446 US 901 [1980]). | 2 | 2 |
Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v. Board of Educationgreen2 sentences1990There is no question that a urine test ordered by the government to detect drug abuse constitutes a search under both the State and Federal Constitutions (Matter of Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 57 ; Matter of Caruso v Ward, supra; Treasury Employees v Von Raab, 489 US 656 ; Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Assn., 489 US 602 ). 1989In Matter of Patchogue (supra), the Court of Appeals held that a urine test compelled by a government employer to detect the use of illegal drugs constitutes a search and seizure within the meaning of both the State and Federal Constitu tions (US Const 4th Amend; NY Const, art I, § 12) and that probationary teachers could not be compelled as a condition of tenure to submit to such a test in the absence of reasonable suspicion. | 1 | 5 |
Young v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.green2 sentences2025Corp. , 91 NY2d at 295-297 ). 2025Corp. , 91 NY2d at 295-297). | 1 | 1 |
People v. McCoygreen1 sentence2021Indeed, the statement at issue was compatible with the inference the factfinder can draw from a refusal to [*2]take a urine test ( see People v Thomas , 46 NY2d 100, 110 [1978], appeal dismissed 444 US 891 [1979]; People v Martinez , 186 AD3d 1165, 1166 [2020]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Arnoldgreen2 sentences2021The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror ( see People v Warrington , 28 NY3d 1116, 1120-1121 [2016]; People v Arnold , 96 NY2d 358, 362-363 [2001]), who indicated that it was "very likely" that defendant was guilty if he refused to take a urine test. 2021The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror ( see People v Warrington , 28 NY3d 1116, 1120-1121 [2016]; People v Arnold , 96 NY2d 358, 362-363 [2001]), who indicated that it was "very likely" that defendant was guilty if he refused to take a urine test. | 1 | 1 |
In re Jeremiah Emmanuel R.green1 sentence2021The panelist's statements "in context and as a whole" did not cast serious doubt on her ability to follow the court's instructions and render an impartial verdict based on the evidence adduced at trial ( People v Chambers , 97 NY2d 417, 419 [2002]; see People v Toledo , 101 AD3d 571 [2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 947 [2013]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Chambersgreen1 sentence2021The panelist's statements "in context and as a whole" did not cast serious doubt on her ability to follow the court's instructions and render an impartial verdict based on the evidence adduced at trial ( People v Chambers , 97 NY2d 417, 419 [2002]; see People v Toledo , 101 AD3d 571 [2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 947 [2013]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Warringtongreen2 sentences2021The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror ( see People v Warrington , 28 NY3d 1116, 1120-1121 [2016]; People v Arnold , 96 NY2d 358, 362-363 [2001]), who indicated that it was "very likely" that defendant was guilty if he refused to take a urine test. 2021The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror ( see People v Warrington , 28 NY3d 1116, 1120-1121 [2016]; People v Arnold , 96 NY2d 358, 362-363 [2001]), who indicated that it was "very likely" that defendant was guilty if he refused to take a urine test. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Thomasgreen1 sentence2021Indeed, the statement at issue was compatible with the inference the factfinder can draw from a refusal to [*2]take a urine test ( see People v Thomas , 46 NY2d 100, 110 [1978], appeal dismissed 444 US 891 [1979]; People v Martinez , 186 AD3d 1165, 1166 [2020]). | 1 | 1 |
Edwards v. Goordgreen1 sentence2018The Hearing Officer acknowledged petitioner's retaliation defense and questioned the officer who collected the urine sample and the officer who tested it, and they both testified that they followed the proper protocol in collecting and testing the sample and denied that they were involved in any retaliatory conspiracy against petitioner ( see Matter of Edwards v Goord , 11 AD3d 832, 833 [2004]). | 1 | 1 |
In re Audrey I.green1 sentence2010In addition, while the child has spent the last year with the aunt and by all accounts has thrived in her care, respondent, after being evicted from her federally subsidized apartment, has failed to establish a permanent residence and was homeless when this proceeding was commenced (see Matter of Audrey I., 57 AD3d 1172, 1173 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 704 [2009]). | 1 | 1 |
Wasserman v. Carellagreen1 sentence2010While the expert opines that the decedent did not require a urine test, blood test, CT scan, MRI or X ray, he does not explain “what defendant did and why” (Wasserman v Carella, 307 AD2d 225, 226 [2003]). | 1 | 1 |
People of State of New York v. Neurothgreen1 sentence2008Defendant’s allegations that he was unable to afford a urine test and that he was recycling the cans merely raised issues of credibility to be resolved by County Court (see People v Neuroth, 172 AD2d 886, 887 [1991], lv denied 78 NY2d 956 [1991]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Caseygreen1 sentence2007Well-established standards exist for courts reviewing accusatory instruments for facial insufficiency: “So long as the factual allegations of an information give an accused notice sufficient to prepare a defense and are adequately detailed to prevent a defendant from being tried twice for the same offense, they should be given a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading” (People v Casey, 95 NY2d 354, 360 [2000]). | 1 | 1 |
Dozier v. New York Citygreen1 sentence1988More recently, urine tests which are part of a required medical examination for applicants for public safety-related jobs were found to be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if, as here, "the applicant is given reasonable notice of the drug testing” (Matter of Dozier v New York City, 130 AD2d 128, 137 [2d Dept 1987]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Williams v. Hamilton
green
2 sentences2024There is no requirement that the accusatory instrument also contain an allegation of erratic driving (see People v Fiumara , 116 AD3d 421 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1036 [2014]). 2024There is no requirement that the accusatory instrument also contain an allegation of erratic driving (see People v Fiumara , 116 AD3d 421 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1036 [2014]). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Caruso v. Ward
green
2 sentences1994In light of the sensitive nature of the petitioner’s employment and the fact that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that the urine test would turn up evidence that the petitioner was impaired, the Deputy Chiefs order that the petitioner submit to a drug test was reasonable (see, Matter of Caruso v Ward, 72 NY2d 432 ; Matter of Longo v Dolce, 192 AD2d 157 ; Matter of Barretto v City of New York, 157 AD2d 116 ). 1990There is no question that a urine test ordered by the government to detect drug abuse constitutes a search under both the State and Federal Constitutions (Matter of Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 57 ; Matter of Caruso v Ward, supra; Treasury Employees v Von Raab, 489 US 656 ; Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Assn., 489 US 602 ). | 2 | 1990–1994 |
Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.
green
2 sentences1993It is well settled that the collection and subsequent analysis of urine samples are deemed searches within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment (see, Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Assn., 489 US 602 ; Copeland v Philadelphia Police Dept., 840 F2d 1139, cert denied 490 US 1004 ; Matter of Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 57 ). 1990There is no question that a urine test ordered by the government to detect drug abuse constitutes a search under both the State and Federal Constitutions (Matter of Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 57 ; Matter of Caruso v Ward, supra; Treasury Employees v Von Raab, 489 US 656 ; Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Assn., 489 US 602 ). | 2 | 1990–1993 |
National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab
green
2 sentences1990There is no question that a urine test ordered by the government to detect drug abuse constitutes a search under both the State and Federal Constitutions (Matter of Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 57 ; Matter of Caruso v Ward, supra; Treasury Employees v Von Raab, 489 US 656 ; Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Assn., 489 US 602 ). 1989Such an applicant has a diminished expectation of privacy in respect to the intrusion occasioned by a urine test (see, National Treasury Employees Union v Von Raab, 489 US —, 109 S Ct 1384 , supra). | 2 | 1989–1990 |
Thomas v. New York
green
1 sentence2021Indeed, the statement at issue was compatible with the inference the factfinder can draw from a refusal to [*2]take a urine test ( see People v Thomas , 46 NY2d 100, 110 [1978], appeal dismissed 444 US 891 [1979]; People v Martinez , 186 AD3d 1165, 1166 [2020]). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
MATTER OF MOORING v. American Airlines
green
1 sentence2010In addition, while the child has spent the last year with the aunt and by all accounts has thrived in her care, respondent, after being evicted from her federally subsidized apartment, has failed to establish a permanent residence and was homeless when this proceeding was commenced (see Matter of Audrey I., 57 AD3d 1172, 1173 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 704 [2009]). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Dragan v. Commissioner of Education
neutral
1 sentence1999We conclude that, absent any evidence that petitioner violated either subdivision (2) or subdivision (3) of Louisiana Revised Statutes Annotated § 14:70.1 (A), the Hearing Committee’s determination is necessarily founded upon speculation and must be annulled as unsupported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Dragan v Commissioner of Educ. of State of N. Y., 142 AD2d 846, 848 ). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Barretto v. City of New York
green
1 sentence1994In light of the sensitive nature of the petitioner’s employment and the fact that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that the urine test would turn up evidence that the petitioner was impaired, the Deputy Chiefs order that the petitioner submit to a drug test was reasonable (see, Matter of Caruso v Ward, 72 NY2d 432 ; Matter of Longo v Dolce, 192 AD2d 157 ; Matter of Barretto v City of New York, 157 AD2d 116 ). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Longo v. Dolce
green
1 sentence1994In light of the sensitive nature of the petitioner’s employment and the fact that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that the urine test would turn up evidence that the petitioner was impaired, the Deputy Chiefs order that the petitioner submit to a drug test was reasonable (see, Matter of Caruso v Ward, 72 NY2d 432 ; Matter of Longo v Dolce, 192 AD2d 157 ; Matter of Barretto v City of New York, 157 AD2d 116 ). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Federal Savings & Loan Insurance v. Murdock-SC Associates
green
1 sentence1993It is well settled that the collection and subsequent analysis of urine samples are deemed searches within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment (see, Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Assn., 489 US 602 ; Copeland v Philadelphia Police Dept., 840 F2d 1139, cert denied 490 US 1004 ; Matter of Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 57 ). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
People v. Restrepo
green
1 sentence1992Petitioner offers nothing more than inadequate speculation and surmise (see, Matter of Curry v Coughlin, 175 AD2d 970 ). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Matthews v. Kelly
neutral
1 sentence1988While this court has held that an inmate’s refusal to submit to the urine test is subject to discipline as a refusal to obey a direct order (see, Matter of Matthews v Kelly, 119 AD2d 1004 ), that issue is not properly before us in view of the partial judgment entered upon the stipulation. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v. Board of Education of Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District
green
1 sentence1987The court stated: "Balancing a Board of Education’s interest in ensuring that its employees are fit to perform their jobs against the teachers’ reasonable expectation of privacy, we hold that the reasonable suspicion standard is the appropriate basis for constitutionally compelling a public school teacher to submit to a urine test for the purposes of detecting the use of controlled substances” ( 119 AD2d 35, 40 ). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| People ex rel. Corcoran v. Smith neutral | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| Karaminites v. Reid neutral | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| Allen v. City of Marietta green | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| King v. McMickens green | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| People v. Wiley neutral | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.