| People ex rel. Lifrieri v Lee |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 02322 [116 AD3d 720] |
| April 2, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York ex rel. DemetrioLifrieri, Appellant, v William A. Lee, Respondent. |
—[*1] Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Steven C. Wu andPatrick J. Walsh of counsel), for respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70 for a writ of habeas corpus, thepetitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court,Dutchess County (Brands, J.), dated November 7, 2011, which, without a hearing, deniedthe petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
"A writ of habeas corpus may not be used for review of issues that have been, orcould have been, reviewed on direct appeal or by a postjudgment motion addressed to thecourt in which an underlying judgment of conviction was rendered" (People ex rel. Dushain vErcole, 64 AD3d 669 [2009]; see People ex rel. Bedell v Ercole, 71 AD3d 801 [2010];People ex rel. Burgess vErcole, 70 AD3d 735 [2010]; People ex rel. Abdul-Aziz v Marshall, 68 AD3d 902[2009]). Here, the allegations in the petition do not warrant departure from traditionalorderly procedure (see People ex rel. Keitt v McMann, 18 NY2d 257, 262[1966]). Even if any of the petitioner's particular arguments had merit, the only reliefavailable would be a new trial. Since the petitioner would not be entitled to immediaterelease from prison, habeas corpus relief does not lie for this reason as well (seePeople ex rel. Douglas v Vincent, 50 NY2d 901, 903 [1980]; People ex rel. Bazil vMarshall, 77 AD3d 982 [2010]; People ex rel. Hall v Rock, 71 AD3d 1303 [2010]).Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Miller and LaSalle, JJ., concur.