People ex rel. Nailor v. Kirkpatrick

2017 NY Slip Op 8781, 156 A.D.3d 1100, 65 N.Y.S.3d 469, 2017 WL 6374615
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 14, 2017
Docket524816
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 8781 (People ex rel. Nailor v. Kirkpatrick) 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. Nailor v. Kirkpatrick, 2017 NY Slip Op 8781, 156 A.D.3d 1100, 65 N.Y.S.3d 469, 2017 WL 6374615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered March 22, 2017 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 is currently serving an aggregate prison term of 25 to 75 years following his 1999 conviction of multiple counts of sodomy in the first degree, sodomy in the second degree and sexual abuse in the second degree. He commenced this CPLR article 70 proceeding seeking a writ of habeas corpus claiming that, among other things, the indictment was defective and Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction. Supreme Court denied petitioner’s application without a hearing, and petitioner now appeals.

“Habeas corpus is not the appropriate remedy for raising claims that could have been raised on direct appeal or in the context of a CPL article 440 motion, even if they are jurisdictional in nature” (People ex rel. Miller v Rock, 109 AD3d 1062, 1062 [2013] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see People ex rel. Fauntleroy v Rock, 113 AD3d 982, 983 [2014], lv denied 22 NY3d 865 [2014]; People ex rel. Williams v Cunningham, 106 AD3d 1303, 1304 [2013]). We agree with Supreme Court that petitioner’s contentions could have been raised on his direct appeal. As we perceive no basis to depart from traditional orderly procedure, we conclude that Supreme Court properly denied his application (see People ex rel. Fauntleroy v Rock, 113 AD3d at 983; People ex rel. Cato v Tedford, 108 AD3d 988, 989 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 855 [2013]; People ex rel. Williams v Cunningham, 106 AD3d at 1304).

McCarthy, J.R, Garry, Rose, Aarons and Rumsey, 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. Rudolph v. Lilley
215 A.D.3d 1196 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People ex rel. Nailor v. Rockwood
186 N.Y.S.3d 442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People ex rel. Smythe v. Miller
2020 NY Slip Op 2349 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People ex rel. West v. Coveny
2020 NY Slip Op 1884 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People ex rel. Dixon v. Superintendent of E. Corr. Facility
2020 NY Slip Op 1866 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People ex rel. Jones v. Collado
2019 NY Slip Op 9076 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People ex rel. Moise v. Coveny
2019 NY Slip Op 6668 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People ex rel. Hill v. Miller
2019 NY Slip Op 6048 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People ex rel. Thompson v. Keyser
2019 NY Slip Op 5249 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People, ex rel. DeFreitas v. Callado
2019 NY Slip Op 4073 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. LaClair
2018 NY Slip Op 3880 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 8781, 156 A.D.3d 1100, 65 N.Y.S.3d 469, 2017 WL 6374615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-nailor-v-kirkpatrick-nyappdiv-2017.