People ex rel. Hatzman v. Senkowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Hatzman v. Senkowski

251 A.D.2d 828, 675 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7430

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

DecidedJune 18, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 828 (People ex rel. Hatzman v. Senkowski) 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. Hatzman v. Senkowski, 251 A.D.2d 828, 675 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered May 13, 1997 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Petitioner seeks habeas corpus relief claiming that he is entitled to a credit for jail time served on previous reversed convictions and that his maximum release date was improperly computed. Inasmuch as petitioner has been released from custody, he is not entitled to the extraordinary relief of habeas corpus and his appeal must be dismissed as moot (see, People [829]*829ex rel. Nunez v New York State Bd. of Parole, 182 AD2d 998; People ex rel. Bressette v Superintendent of Great Meadow Correctional Facility, 175 AD2d 961). In any event, the arguments concerning jail credit for time served were previously rejected in a prior habeas corpus proceeding brought by petitioner (see, People ex rel. Hatzman v Kuhlmann, 191 AD2d 976, appeal dismissed, Iv denied 82 NY2d 683) and we perceive no error in the calculation of his sentences (see, Penal Law § 70.40 [3] [a]; § 70.30 [1] [b]; [3]).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, 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 (Feldstein, J.), entered May 13, 1997 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Petitioner seeks habeas corpus relief claiming that he is entitled to a credit for jail time served on previous reversed convictions and that his maximum release date was improperly computed. Inasmuch as petitioner has been released from custody, he is not entitled to the extraordinary relief of habeas corpus and his appeal must be dismissed as moot (see, People [829]*829ex rel. Nunez v New York State Bd. of Parole, 182 AD2d 998; People ex rel. Bressette v Superintendent of Great Meadow Correctional Facility, 175 AD2d 961). In any event, the arguments concerning jail credit for time served were previously rejected in a prior habeas corpus proceeding brought by petitioner (see, People ex rel. Hatzman v Kuhlmann, 191 AD2d 976, appeal dismissed, Iv denied 82 NY2d 683) and we perceive no error in the calculation of his sentences (see, Penal Law § 70.40 [3] [a]; § 70.30 [1] [b]; [3]).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 828, 675 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-hatzman-v-senkowski-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack