Opinion
2012-06-8
The PEOPLE of the State of New York ex rel. Nathan LEWIS, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Harold D. GRAHAM, Superintendent, Auburn Correctional Facility, Respondent–Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Thomas G. Leone, A.J.), entered March 7, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70. The judgment granted the motion of respondent to dismiss and dismissed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Adam H. Van Buskirk, Aurora, for petitioner-appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marlene O. Tuczinski of Counsel), for respondent-respondent.
Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Thomas G. Leone, A.J.), entered March 7, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70. The judgment granted the motion of respondent to dismiss and dismissed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Adam H. Van Buskirk, Aurora, for petitioner-appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marlene O. Tuczinski of Counsel), for respondent-respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
Petitioner commenced this proceeding seeking a writ of habeas corpus. We conclude that Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition. Habeas corpus relief is unavailable because petitioner's contention in support of the petition “could have been, or [was], raised on direct appeal or by a motion pursuant to CPL article 440” ( People ex rel. Mills v. Poole, 55 A.D.3d 1289, 1290, 864 N.Y.S.2d 364,lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 712, 872 N.Y.S.2d 717, 901 N.E.2d 208;see People ex rel. Robinson v. Graham, 68 A.D.3d 1706, 892 N.Y.S.2d 692,lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 706, 2010 WL 1235655). “Habeas corpus relief also is unavailable because petitioner would not be entitled to immediate release from custody even in the event that his contention[ ] had merit” ( People ex rel. Almodovar v. Berbary, 67 A.D.3d 1419, 1420, 887 N.Y.S.2d 890,lv. denied14 N.Y.3d 703, 2010 WL 547895;see People ex rel. Kaplan v. Commissioner of Correction of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 648, 649, 467 N.Y.S.2d 566, 454 N.E.2d 1309). Finally, “[b]ecause the petition lacked any justiciable basis upon which a writ of habeas corpus could be sustained, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner's application for assigned counsel” *904( People ex rel. Gloss v. Costello, 309 A.D.2d 1160, 1161, 764 N.Y.S.2d 895,lv. denied1 N.Y.3d 504, 775 N.Y.S.2d 781, 807 N.E.2d 894 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People ex rel. Hinton v. Graham, 66 A.D.3d 1402, 1402, 885 N.Y.S.2d 663,lv. denied13 N.Y.3d 934, 895 N.Y.S.2d 310, 922 N.E.2d 899,rearg. denied14 N.Y.3d 795, 899 N.Y.S.2d 126, 925 N.E.2d 929).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.