Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petition was properly dismissed as the petitioner's contentions regarding his alleged erroneous sentencing to consecutive terms of incarceration and the trial court's failure to submit a lesser included offense to the jury are "claims which were or could have been reviewed on direct appeal from [the] judgment of conviction [and] are not subject to review by habeas corpus" (Matter of Williams v Scully, 135 A.D.2d 721; see, People ex rel. Vaughn v Sullivan, 135 A.D.2d 765; People ex rel. Nelson v Scully, 119 A.D.2d 709, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 602; People ex rel. Sales v LeFevre, 93 A.D.2d 945, lv denied 60 N.Y.2d 558). Moreover, because neither of these claims, if meritorious, would entitle the petitioner to immediate release from custody, habeas corpus relief is inappropriate (see, People ex rel. Kaplan v Commissioner of Correction of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 648; People ex rel. Douglas v Vincent, 50 N.Y.2d 901; People ex rel. Robinson v Scully, 122 A.D.2d 290). In any event, we find the aforementioned contentions to be without merit.
Finally, we do not consider the petitioner's numerous remaining claims, as they were not raised in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, and are advanced for the first time on the instant appeal. Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Sullivan, JJ., concur.