Majority
In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the
Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
No factual or legal basis has been alleged which would render the indictment underlying petitioner’s conviction jurisdiction-ally defective (cf. People ex rel. Sales v LeFevre, 93 AD2d 945 , lv denied 60 NY2d 558 ). Moreover, since all of the remaining issues either could have been raised on direct appeal or on a motion pursuant to CPL article 440, or would not result in petitioner’s immediate release, habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy (see, People ex rel. Kaplan v Commissioner of Correction of City of N. Y., 60 NY2d 648 , 649; People ex rel. Douglas v Vincent, 50 NY2d 901 , 903; People ex rel. Taylor v Commissioner of Correction, 100 AD2d 525 ; People ex rel. Myers v Dalsheim, 97 AD2d 447 , lv denied 61 NY2d 601 ; People ex rel. Sales v LeFevre, supra; People ex rel. Hall v LeFevre, 92 AD2d 956 , affd 60 NY2d 579 ). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Gibbons and Bracken, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People ex rel. Sales v. LeFevre 93 AD2d 945 p. 420
- People ex rel. Kaplan v. Commissioner of Correction 60 NY2d 648 at 649 p. 420
- People ex rel. Douglas v. Vincent 50 NY2d 901 at 903 p. 420
- People ex rel. Hall v. LeFevre 60 NY2d 579 p. 420