People ex rel. Dushain v. Ercole
This text of 64 A.D.3d 669 (People ex rel. Dushain v. Ercole) 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.
Opinion
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.
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 [2005]; People ex rel. Barnes v Fischer, 303 AD2d 526 [2003]; People ex rel. Pearson v Garvin, 211 AD2d 690, 691 [1995]; People ex rel. Moore v Scully, 189 AD2d 845 [1993]; People ex rel. Benbow v Scully, 189 AD2d 844 [1993]). The allegations in the petition do not warrant departure from traditional orderly procedure (see People ex rel. Keitt v McMann, 18 NY2d 257, 262 [1966]; see also CPL 210.30 [6]). Spolzino, J.P, Angiolillo, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
64 A.D.3d 669, 881 N.Y.S.2d 899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-dushain-v-ercole-nyappdiv-2009.