In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), dated January 31, 2008, which, without a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., MARK C. DILLON, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL and CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant's contention that a federal detention warrant compelling him to remain in custody has lapsed is based upon material dehors the record (see People ex rel. Roache v Connell, 31 AD3d 1199). Moreover, habeas corpus is an inappropriate remedy for addressing the appellant's other contention that a good time allowance was improperly withheld from him (see People ex rel. Barnes v Allard, 25 AD3d 893, 894; People ex rel. Richardson v West, 24 AD3d 996, 997). Accordingly, the appellant failed to establish that he would be entitled to an immediate release from custody if a writ of habeas corpus were granted (see People ex rel. Kaplan v Commissioner of Correction of City of N.Y., 60 NY2d 648; People ex rel. DeFlumer v Strack, 212 AD2d 555).
RIVERA, J.P., DILLON, LEVENTHAL and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw ...