Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Matter of Ortiz v. Venettozzi
Citation: 2018 NY Slip Op 587Docket: 524913
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; January 31, 2018; New York; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Gilberto Ortiz petitioned against Donald Venettozzi, Acting Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, challenging a disciplinary determination made by the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision. Ortiz was found guilty of smuggling and possessing contraband after a correction officer discovered him adjusting his pants during a cell search. Initially denying the presence of contraband, Ortiz later admitted to possessing a clear package with an orange powdery substance, identified as crushed suboxone pills. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, Ortiz was charged with smuggling, possessing contraband, possessing drugs, and possessing unauthorized medication. He was convicted of smuggling and possessing contraband but acquitted of the other charges. Ortiz's administrative appeal was denied, prompting the current CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court confirmed the determination, citing substantial evidence including the misbehavior report, testimony, and documentary evidence. Despite the absence of drug testing identifying the substance, Ortiz's admission and the circumstances surrounding its discovery were deemed sufficient to support the charges. The court noted that the Hearing Officer's credibility assessment regarding Ortiz's denial of admitting the substance's identity was appropriate. Additionally, claims of bias against the Hearing Officer were dismissed, as no impartiality issues were found. Other preserved arguments from Ortiz were evaluated and found to lack merit. The court adjudged the disciplinary determination to be confirmed without costs, resulting in the dismissal of Ortiz's petition.