People ex rel. Haynes v. Artus
This text of 51 A.D.3d 1075 (People ex rel. Haynes v. Artus) 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
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered March 22, 2007 in Clinton County, which denied petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.
Petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70 for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that the documentation purporting to authorize the execution of his sentence is insufficient. Supreme Court denied the application without a hearing and we affirm. The record contains a document entitled “sentence and order of commitment,” which satisfies the statutory requirements (see CPL 380.60). Inasmuch as it is evident that a valid judgment of conviction was entered, petitioner’s challenge to the denomination of the documentation authorizing his incarceration is unavailing (see People ex rel. Harris v Lindsay, 21 AD2d 102, 106 [1964], affd 15 NY2d 751 [1965]; see also Matter of Frazier v Greene, 10 AD3d 743, 743 [2004]). Accordingly, petitioner’s application was properly denied without a hearing.
Cardona, EJ., Spain, Rose, Lahtinen and Malone Jr., 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
51 A.D.3d 1075, 855 N.Y.S.2d 382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-haynes-v-artus-nyappdiv-2008.