Summary
holding that where sole evidence of drug use was uncertified report of private laboratory concerning defendant's urine samples, evidence was not sufficiently reliable to satisfy state's burden of proof, even though hearsay is admissible in parole revocation proceeding
Summary of this case from State v. SanchezOpinion
July 13, 1990
Appeal from the Oswego County Court, Auser, J.
Present — Doerr, J.P., Boomer, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant's claim regarding jail-time credit is not properly before this court on direct appeal from the judgment of conviction (CPL 450.10 et seq; People v. Curtis, 143 A.D.2d 1030, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 890; People v. Leonard, 133 A.D.2d 938). Defendant's proper remedy is by way of a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review the prison authorities' calculation of the jail-time credit to which he claims entitlement (People v. Curtis, supra, at 1030; People v. Vivenzio, 103 A.D.2d 1044, 1045; People v. Blake, 39 A.D.2d 587).