From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex Rel. McGourty v. Senkowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 30, 1995
213 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 30, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Clinton County (Lewis, J.).


After a jury trial, petitioner was convicted of a number of crimes, including criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and burglary in the second degree. In this proceeding, he claims that he was improperly sentenced as a persistent felon because a California burglary conviction, which was relied upon in sentencing him as a persistent felony offender, may not be considered for purposes of enhancing a sentence in New York. We agree with Supreme Court that habeas corpus is not a proper remedy in this case. If his claim had merit, petitioner would, at most, be entitled to resentencing and not immediate release. Accordingly, habeas corpus relief does not lie.

Mercure, J.P., White, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

People ex Rel. McGourty v. Senkowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 30, 1995
213 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People ex Rel. McGourty v. Senkowski

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. JAMES E. McGOURTY, Appellant…

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

Date published: Mar 30, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
624 N.Y.S.2d 308

Citing Cases

People v. Senkowski

Review of the record, however, reveals that the victim of the robbery clearly and unequivocally identified…

People ex rel. Mills v. Lempke

“Irregularities or defects in an order of commitment would not entitle petitioner to immediate release where,…