Opinion
2014-02-6
The PEOPLE of the State of New York ex rel. Jermaine WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. Patrick GRIFFIN, as Superintendent of Sullivan Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.
Jermaine Williams, Fallsburg, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank K. Walsh of counsel), for respondents.
Jermaine Williams, Fallsburg, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank K. Walsh of counsel), for respondents.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (LaBuda, J.), entered December 14, 2012 in Sullivan County, which denied petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.
In October 1996, petitioner was sentenced upon his conviction of murder in the second degree to 25 years to life in prison. His conviction was subsequently affirmed by this Court (People v. Williams, 306 A.D.2d 763, 762 N.Y.S.2d 657 [2003], lv. denied100 N.Y.2d 625, 767 N.Y.S.2d 409, 799 N.E.2d 632 [2003] ). His CPL 440.10 motion was also denied. Thereafter, petitioner brought the instant proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus. Supreme Court denied the petition without a hearing and this appeal ensued.
We affirm. Initially, the proper procedural vehicle for raising a claim of ineffective appellate counsel is a motion for a writ of error coram nobis and, consequently, petitioner may not raise such a claim in the context of this proceeding ( see People v. Bachert, 69 N.Y.2d 593, 598–600, 516 N.Y.S.2d 623, 509 N.E.2d 318 [1987]; People ex rel. Rosado v. Napoli, 83 A.D.3d 1347, 1347–1348, 920 N.Y.S.2d 922 [2011], lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 710, 2011 WL 4356486 [2011] ). Moreover, given that petitioner's remaining contentions could have been raised either on direct appeal or in a CPL article 440 motion, habeas corpus relief is not the appropriate remedy ( see People ex rel. Cato v. Tedford, 108 A.D.3d 988, 989, 968 N.Y.S.2d 914 [2013], lv. denied22 N.Y.3d 855, 2013 WL 6009613 [2013]; People ex rel. Fulton v. LaValley, 100 A.D.3d 1202, 1203, 953 N.Y.S.2d 911 [2012] ). In any event, habeas corpus relief is unavailable because, even if these contentions had merit, petitioner would not be entitled to immediate release from prison ( see People ex rel. Burr v. Rock, 100 A.D.3d 1175, 1175, 953 N.Y.S.2d 907 [2012], lv. denied20 N.Y.3d 858, 2013 WL 452180 [2013]; People ex rel. Lewis v. Graham, 96 A.D.3d 1423, 945 N.Y.S.2d 903 [2012], lv. denied19 N.Y.3d 813, 2012 WL 4936632 [2012] ). Therefore, we find no reason to disturb Supreme Court's judgment.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs. PETERS, P.J., McCARTHY, GARRY and ROSE, JJ., concur.