Opinion
535065
02-09-2023
The People of the State of New York ex rel. Robert Hook, Appellant, v. Jeffrey Tedford, as Superintendent of Adirondack Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Robert Hook, Raybrook, appellant pro se. Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Sean P. Mix of counsel), for respondent.
Calendar Date:January 6, 2023
Robert Hook, Raybrook, appellant pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Sean P. Mix of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark, Aarons and Pritzker, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Richard B. Meyer, J.), entered February 22, 2022 in Essex County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, granted respondent's motion to dismiss the petition.
Petitioner is serving a prison term of 20 years upon his 2009 conviction, following a jury trial, of aggravated sexual abuse in the first degree, attempted rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, unlawful imprisonment in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, which conviction was affirmed on appeal (People v Hook, 80 A.D.3d 881 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 N.Y.3d 806 [2011]). In 2012, petitioner unsuccessfully sought habeas corpus relief in federal court (see Hook v Capra, 2014 WL 3895233, *1, 2014 U.S. Dist LEXIS 109383, *28 [ND NY, Aug. 8, 2014, No. 9:12-CV-00288-JKS]). Petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 70 proceeding seeking a writ of habeas corpus alleging that the indictment was defective because it was based upon fabricated testimony and, therefore, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Supreme Court granted respondent's subsequent motion to dismiss the petition. Petitioner appeals.
We affirm. "Habeas corpus relief is not an appropriate remedy for asserting claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal or in a CPL article 440 motion, even if they are jurisdictional in nature" (People ex rel. Golston v Kirkpatrick, 153 A.D.3d 1498, 1498-1499 [3d Dept 2017] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], appeal dismissed 30 N.Y.3d 1031 [2017], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 903 [2018]; see People ex rel. Brown v Tedford, 196 A.D.3d 965, 966 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 918 [2022]). Petitioner's jurisdictional challenge to the indictment could have been raised on direct appeal or in a CPL article 440 motion. As the circumstances here do not reflect any basis to depart from traditional orderly procedure, we discern no basis to disturb Supreme Court's dismissal of petitioner's request for habeas corpus relief (see People ex rel. Kelsey v Lewin, 203 A.D.3d 1366, 1367 [3d Dept 2022], appeal dismissed 38 N.Y.3d 1054 [2022]; People v Moise, 175 A.D.3d 1693, 1694 [3d Dept 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 912 [2020]).
Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark, Aarons and Pritzker, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.