Opinion
July 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Demarest, J.
Petitioner commenced this proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus, contending that the indictment which led to his conviction of murder in the second degree was jurisdictionally defective, that the prosecution was improperly allowed to amend the indictment and that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Supreme Court dismissed the application and we affirm. Given that petitioner could have raised these issues on his direct appeal or in a motion pursuant to CPL article 440, habeas corpus is an inappropriate remedy ( see, People ex rel. Rodriguez v. Kahlmann, 239 A.D.2d 721, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 808; People ex rel. Barrett v. Scully, 203 A.D.2d 311) and we find no reason to depart from traditional orderly procedure in this case.
Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, White, Peters and Graffeo, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.