Peters, J.P.
Petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus sought release from the Schenectady County jail on the grounds that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel as well as the right to a speedy trial. Supreme Court summarily denied the application without a hearing and petitioner now appeals.
We affirm. Neither of petitioner's claims is properly brought via an application for a writ of habeas corpus but rather is more properly the subject of a direct appeal from the judgment of conviction or a CPL article 440 motion ( see People ex rel. Barnett v. Senkowski, 294 AD2d 686, 686-687; People ex rel. Hall v. Campbell, 290 AD2d 672, 673, lv denied 98 NY2d 601; People ex rel. White v. La Vallee, 51 AD2d 1093, 1094). Furthermore, we find no extraordinary circumstances presented here that "warrant a departure from the prescribed orderly procedures" ( People ex rel. Woodard v. Senkowski, 305 AD2d 879, [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 511).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.