MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 70 proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus asserting that his certificate of conviction is deficient because it failed to reasonably identify his conviction for murder. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and we affirm. Because petitioner could have raised this argument either on his direct appeal or by way of a CPL article 440 motion, habeas corpus relief is not the proper remedy (see People ex rel. Burr v Duncan, 289 A.D.2d 898, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 612; People ex rel. Burr v McGinnis, 276 A.D.2d 951, 952, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 770, cert denied 531 U.S. 1199). In any event, even if petitioner was successful in his argument, he would not be entitled to immediate release from prison (see id.). Accordingly, habeas corpus relief is unavailable to petitioner. To the extent that petitioner maintains that he should have been afforded a hearing, we note that he was not entitled to a hearing as there are "no triable issues of fact and a summary determination [could] be made upon the pleadings" ( People ex rel. Shaffer v Kuhlmann, 173 A.D.2d 1034, 1035, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 856).
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.