SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
July 14, 2009
THE PEOPLE, ETC., EX REL. CARL DUSHAIN, APPELLANT,
ROBERT E. ERCOLE, ETC., RESPONDENT.
In a habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), dated November 7, 2007, 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.
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO, J.P., DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, CHERYL E. CHAMBERS & PLUMMER E. LOTT, JJ.
(Index No. 5157/07)
DECISION & ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
A writ of habeas corpus may not be used for review of issues that have been, or could have been, reviewed on direct appeal or by a postjudgment motion addressed to the court in which an underlying judgment of conviction was rendered (see People ex rel. Almeyda v Schultz, 18 AD3d 582; People ex rel. Barnes v Fischer, 303 AD2d 526; People ex rel. Pearson v Garvin, 211 AD2d 690, 691; People ex rel. Moore v Scully, 189 AD2d 845; People ex rel. Benbow v Scully, 189 AD2d 844). The allegations in the petition do not warrant departure from traditional orderly procedure (see People ex rel. Keitt v McMann, 18 NY2d 257, 262; see also CPL 210.30).
SPOLZINO, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, CHAMBERS and LOTT, JJ., concur.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.