From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re of Adam Ramos v. William

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 15, 2010
74 A.D.3d 1080 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

Nos. 2008-08739, 2008-11440.

June 15, 2010.

In a proceeding originally commenced pursuant to CPLR article 70 for a writ of habeas corpus, and converted to a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, the petitioner appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), dated July 29, 2008, which, sua sponte, converted the proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70 into a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review an undated determination of the New York State Department of Correctional Services that terms of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner on February 1, 2002, must run consecutively to certain undischarged terms of imprisonment previously imposed upon him, and (2) an order and judgment (one paper) of the same court dated November 17, 2008, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Adam Ramos, also known as Angelo Ramos, Otisville, N.Y., appellant pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Peter Karanjia and Sudarsana Srinivasan of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Covello, J.P., Florio, Miller and Eng, JJ.


Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an intermediate order in a habeas corpus proceeding ( see People ex rel. Falaq v Dalsheim, 122 AD2d 93; CPLR 7011); and it is further,

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the New York State Department of Correctional Services did not exceed its authority in determining that, pursuant to the mandatory provisions of Penal Law § 70.25 (2-a), the terms of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner on February 1, 2002, must run consecutively to undischarged sentences previously imposed upon him ( see People ex rel. Gill v Greene, 12 NY3d 1, cert denied sub nom. Gill v Rock, 558 US ___, 130 S Ct 86; Matter of Soto v Fischer, 60 AD3d 1074, 1075). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

In re of Adam Ramos v. William

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 15, 2010
74 A.D.3d 1080 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

In re of Adam Ramos v. William

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ADAM RAMOS, Also Known as ANGELO RAMOS, Appellant, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 15, 2010

Citations

74 A.D.3d 1080 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 5407
902 N.Y.S.2d 384

Citing Cases

Ramos v. Connolly

Decided November 18, 2010. Appeal from the 2d Dept: 74 AD3d 1080. Motions for Leave to Appeal…

People v. Walters

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. Since the County Court correctly determined that Penal Law § 70.25…