From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex Rel. Benbow v. Scully

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 19, 1993
189 A.D.2d 844 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

January 19, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Amodeo, J.).


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

The petitioner is incarcerated pursuant to two judgments of conviction, one premised upon a jury verdict in Westchester County, and the other premised upon the petitioner's plea of guilty in Rockland County. Both judgments were affirmed on appeal. He raises a variety of arguments concerning the Rockland County judgment, all of which were or could have been raised on direct appeal. He also asserts that the Westchester County judgment stands or falls with the Rockland County judgment because his arrest for crimes committed in Rockland County produced information that led to his arrest for the Westchester County crimes.

Although it is well settled that a habeas corpus proceeding is a procedural tool "`of * * * great flexibility and vague scope'" (People ex rel. Keitt v. McMann, 18 N.Y.2d 257, 263, quoting 1959 N Y Legis Doc No. 17, at 49), it is also well settled that the writ may not be used to review questions already passed upon or, absent reasons of practicality and necessity, questions that could have been raised by direct appeal or by collateral attack in the court of conviction (see, People ex rel. Keitt v. McMann, supra; see also, People ex rel. Hampton v. Scully, 166 A.D.2d 734; People ex rel. Gasper v. Sullivan, 164 A.D.2d 926). Since the petitioner presents no constitutional or fundamental statutory claim not already reviewed which would warrant departure from traditional orderly process (see, People ex rel. Keitt v McMann, 18 N.Y.2d 257, supra), the Supreme Court properly determined that the petitioner's application was procedurally barred. We note, moreover, that because the petitioner failed to interpose meritorious claims to all counts of both judgments, he failed to establish entitlement to immediate release (see, People ex rel. Douglas v. Vincent, 50 N.Y.2d 901; People ex rel. Nalo v. Sullivan, 120 A.D.2d 759). Thompson, J.P., Balletta, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People ex Rel. Benbow v. Scully

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 19, 1993
189 A.D.2d 844 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People ex Rel. Benbow v. Scully

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. JOSEPH BENBOW, Appellant, v…

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

Date published: Jan 19, 1993

Citations

189 A.D.2d 844 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
592 N.Y.S.2d 445

Citing Cases

People ex rel. Cassar v. Margiotta

"A person illegally imprisoned or otherwise restrained in his [or her] liberty within the state ... may…

Smalls v. Smith

" People ex rel. Douglas v. Vincent, 416 N.Y.S.2d 307, 309 (App. Div. 1979) (internal quotation marks…