Opinion
July 7, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.).
Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
No appeal lies from an order entered upon consent (see, Baecher v Baecher, 95 A.D.2d 841; People v Stewart, 83 A.D.2d 713), nor from an intermediate order in a habeas corpus proceeding (see, CPLR 7011; People ex rel. Johnson v Romano, 108 A.D.2d 888; People ex rel. Ardito v Trujillo, 88 A.D.2d 1002). Moreover, since a direct appeal from the judgment of conviction is currently pending and since the issues raised by the petitioner with respect to the propriety of the sentence may be reviewed pursuant to CPL article 440 in the court where he was convicted, habeas corpus would not have been an appropriate remedy (see, People ex rel. Frazier v Coombe, 87 A.D.2d 904). Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.