PEOPLE BURR v. CLARK III (2000)

 The petitions seeking writs of habeas corpus were properly dismissed.   Contrary to petitioner's contention, an evidentiary hearing was not required because no triable issue of fact was raised (see, People ex rel. Robertson v. New York State Div. of Parole, 67 N.Y.2d 197, 203, 501 N.Y.S.2d 634, 492 N.E.2d 762;  see, People ex rel. Lewis v. Meloni, 233 A.D.2d 947, 948, 649 N.Y.S.2d 580, lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 807, 654 N.Y.S.2d 717, 677 N.E.2d 289).   Petitioner contends that he is being unlawfully detained because the order of commitment does not indicate that he was convicted of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, although it lists a sentence of one year for that conviction.   Irregularities or defects in an order of commitment would not entitle petitioner to immediate release where, as here, there is a valid judgment of conviction underlying the commitment (see, People ex rel. Harris v. Lindsay, 21 A.D.2d 102, 106, 248 N.Y.S.2d 691, affd. 15 N.Y.2d 751, 257 N.Y.S.2d 176, 205 N.E.2d 312).   Further, habeas corpus relief is not available to review a sentence that has expired (see, People ex rel. Ganci v. Henderson, 51 A.D.2d 888, 380 N.Y.S.2d 191, lv. denied 38 N.Y.2d 711, 384 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 348 N.E.2d 927).

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: