People ex rel. Broome v. Bartlett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Broome v. Bartlett

188 A.D.2d 772, 591 N.Y.S.2d 813, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13771

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 10, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 188 A.D.2d 772 (People ex rel. Broome v. Bartlett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Broome v. Bartlett, 188 A.D.2d 772, 591 N.Y.S.2d 813, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13771 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Monserrate, J.), entered January 16, 1992 in Chemung County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Petitioner’s application for habeas corpus relief is based upon the alleged repugnancy of the verdicts rendered in his criminal trial. We agree with Supreme Court that habeas corpus relief was inappropriate in this case given the pendency of petitioner’s direct appeal of his conviction and petitioner’s failure to allege facts meriting a departure from traditional orderly procedure (see, People ex rel. Webb v Leonardo, 136 AD2d 840; People ex rel. Sanchez v Hoke, 132 AD2d 861). We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Weiss, P. J., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Monserrate, J.), entered January 16, 1992 in Chemung County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Petitioner’s application for habeas corpus relief is based upon the alleged repugnancy of the verdicts rendered in his criminal trial. We agree with Supreme Court that habeas corpus relief was inappropriate in this case given the pendency of petitioner’s direct appeal of his conviction and petitioner’s failure to allege facts meriting a departure from traditional orderly procedure (see, People ex rel. Webb v Leonardo, 136 AD2d 840; People ex rel. Sanchez v Hoke, 132 AD2d 861). We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Weiss, P. J., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.D.2d 772, 591 N.Y.S.2d 813, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-broome-v-bartlett-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack