People ex rel. Fulton v. Lape

61 A.D.3d 1227, 876 N.Y.S.2d 665
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 23, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 61 A.D.3d 1227 (People ex rel. Fulton v. Lape) 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. Fulton v. Lape, 61 A.D.3d 1227, 876 N.Y.S.2d 665 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered August 26, 2008 in Greene County, which denied petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Petitioner, who is serving a 25-year prison term following his 2002 conviction of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (People v Fulton, 13 AD3d 1217 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 830 [2005]), commenced this CPLR article 70 proceeding seeking a writ of habeas corpus contending, among other things, that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Habeas corpus relief does not lie where, as here, the arguments advanced could have been raised either upon a direct appeal from the judgment of conviction or in the context of a CPL article 440 motion (see People ex rel. Woodard v Lape, 58 AD3d 903, 904 [2009]; People ex rel. Malik v State of New York, 58 [1228]*1228AD3d 1042, 1043 [2009])—even though one of the contentions raised is jurisdictional in nature (see People ex rel. Moore v Connolly, 56 AD3d 847, 848 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 701 [2009]). As our review of the record reveals no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant a departure from traditional orderly procedure, Supreme Court’s judgment is affirmed (see People ex rel. Moore v Connolly, 56 AD3d at 848; People ex rel. Hunter v Buffardi, 15 AD3d 736 [2005]).

Cardona, EJ., Peters, Spain, Lahtinen and Kavanagh, 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

Related

People ex rel. Fulton v. LaValley
100 A.D.3d 1202 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People ex rel. Brown v. Artus
64 A.D.3d 1064 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People ex rel. Chapman v. LaClair
64 A.D.3d 1026 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 A.D.3d 1227, 876 N.Y.S.2d 665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-fulton-v-lape-nyappdiv-2009.