Upon being convicted of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, petitioner was sentenced as a persistent felony offender to a term of 10 years to life in prison. He commenced this habeas corpus proceeding challenging his sentence as illegal on the ground that he should not have been sentenced as a persistent felony offender. Inasmuch as petitioner's argument could have been raised on direct appeal or via a CPL article 440 motion, we agree with Supreme Court that habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy ( see, People ex rel. McGourty v. Senkowski, 213 A.D.2d 954, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 812; People ex rel. Cotton v. Senkowski, 187 A.D.2d 850, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 703). Accordingly, we affirm Supreme Court's judgment.
Mikoll, J.P., Crew III, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.