Opinion
2014-05-2
The PEOPLE of the State of New York ex rel. Leroy PEOPLES, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, Respondent–Respondent.
Alan Birnholz, East Amherst, for Petitioner–Appellant. Leroy Peoples, Petitioner–Appellant Pro Se.
Alan Birnholz, East Amherst, for Petitioner–Appellant. Leroy Peoples, Petitioner–Appellant Pro Se.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, SCONIERS, and VALENTINO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Petitioner commenced this habeas corpus proceeding, contending that the statute of limitations had expired on some of the crimes charged in the indictment, Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction because of his age at the time some of his crimes were committed, and he was illegally extradited from Connecticut to New York. We conclude that Supreme Court properly denied 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. Lewis v. Graham, 96 A.D.3d 1423, 1423, 945 N.Y.S.2d 903,lv. denied19 N.Y.3d 813, 2012 WL 4936632). We note, in any event, contrary to petitioner's contention, that he “failed to ‘present factual issues that would entitle [him] to an evidentiary hearing’ ” ( People ex rel. Mitchell v. Cully, 63 A.D.3d 1679, 1679, 880 N.Y.S.2d 595,lv. denied13 N.Y.3d 708, 2009 WL 3350122;see People ex rel. Jackson v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 253 A.D.2d 919, 919, 678 N.Y.S.2d 304). Petitioner's remaining contentions are not properly before us because they are raised for the first time on appeal ( see People ex rel. Victory v. Travis, 288 A.D.2d 932, 934, 734 N.Y.S.2d 749,lv. denied97 N.Y.2d 611, 740 N.Y.S.2d 695, 767 N.E.2d 152).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.