- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
PEOPLE EX REL. MALDONADO v. ARTUZ
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Dec 20, 1999
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The issue raised in this proceeding could have been reviewed on direct appeal from the judgment of conviction. In addition, the petitioner's CPL article 440 motion, based on the same ground as that raised in the petition, was previously denied, and leave to appeal therefrom was denied. Accordingly, habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy (see, People ex rel. Smith v. Hanslmaier, 237 A.D.2d 473 ; People ex rel. Benbow v. Scully, 189 A.D.2d 844 ; People ex rel. Jackson v. Scully, 183 A.D.2d 799 ; People ex rel. Heath v. Riley, 171 A.D.2d 768 ).
MANGANO, P.J., RITTER, GOLDSTEIN, and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.