From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Schenectady County Court

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 25, 2009
63 A.D.3d 1471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 505884.

June 25, 2009.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lalor, J.), entered September 8, 2008 in Greene County, which denied petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Fredric Maye, Coxsackie, appellant pro se.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Lahtinen, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur.


In 2006, petitioner pleaded guilty to attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and waived his right to appeal. When he failed to complete a substance abuse treatment program that would have entitled him to withdraw his plea, he was sentenced as a second felony offender to six years in prison, to be followed by three to five years of postrelease supervision. Petitioner appealed his conviction and it was upheld by this Court ( People v Maye, 45 AD3d 1110, lv denied 10 NY3d 866). He also made a CPL article 440 motion, which resulted in the postrelease supervision portion of his sentence being reduced to 1½ years. Petitioner then brought the instant application for a writ of habeas corpus, which was denied without a hearing. He now appeals.

We affirm. In his application for habeas corpus relief, petitioner challenges the legality of his sentence and the voluntariness of his plea. Inasmuch as these claims were or could have been raised in his direct appeal or CPL article 440 motion, habeas corpus relief is unavailable ( see People ex rel. Carpenter v Corcoran, 46 AD3d 1468, 1468, lv denied 10 NY3d 706; People ex rel. Washington v Walsh, 43 AD3d 1217, 1217, lv denied 9 NY3d 816). Additionally, even if these claims were found to have merit, petitioner would not be entitled to immediate release from prison ( see People ex rel. Black v New York State Bd. of Parole, 54 AD3d 1077, 1078; People ex rel. Washington v Walsh, 43 AD3d at 1217). Therefore, the petition was properly denied.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

People v. Schenectady County Court

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 25, 2009
63 A.D.3d 1471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

People v. Schenectady County Court

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jun 25, 2009

Citations

63 A.D.3d 1471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 5232
880 N.Y.S.2d 868

Citing Cases

All Boro Psychological Servs. P.C. v. Geico Gen. Ins. Co.

Accordingly, the court finds that Dr. Rosenfeld's peer review report sets forth a sufficient factual basis…

All Boro Psychological Servs. P.C. v. Geico Gen. Ins. Co.

Dr. Rosenfeld further stated this case was straightforward and without subtle or complex issues to…