Cureton v. Goord

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner was found guilty of violating former inmate rule 113.12 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [former (in)] [use of narcotic or controlled substance]). There is no merit to the contention that the Hearing Officer was required to consider the reliability of the confidential informant who provided information that resulted in the urinalysis test (see, Matter of Mitchell v Selsky, 252 AD2d 639, 640; Matter of Brown v Coombe, 241 AD2d 644; see also, 7 NYCRR 1020.4 [a] [1] [iii]). Nor is there any merit to the…