Opinion
June 4, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Washington County (Berke, J.).
Petitioner alleges in this proceeding that his conviction for grand larceny upon a plea of guilty is invalid due to the Supremacy Clause of the Federal Constitution. He contends that the acts underlying the crime for which he was convicted were performed in his role as an informant/agent for the Federal Government, which status afforded him immunity from State criminal prosecution (see, Connecticut v. Marra, 528 F. Supp. 381) . Supreme Court denied the petition and petitioner has appealed.
Habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy in which to raise issues which could have been advanced on direct appeal or in a motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 (People ex rel. Rosado v. Miles, 138 A.D.2d 808). At the time of his conviction, petitioner was aware of the facts and circumstances which he now asserts. His explanation for failing to pursue an appeal or to move to vacate his conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10 is unconvincing and his allegations in the petition do not merit departure from traditional orderly procedure (see, People ex rel. Keitt v McMann, 18 N.Y.2d 257). We further note that the petition contains only conclusory allegations and general assertions that his criminal activities were interrelated with his role as an informant without providing specific facts to support his claim (see, People ex rel. Boyd v. LeFevre, 92 A.D.2d 1042, lv denied 59 N.Y.2d 604; People ex rel. Durrant v. McKendrick, 30 A.D.2d 1021, lv denied 23 N.Y.2d 643).
Yesawich Jr., Crew III, Casey and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.