PEOPLE PATTERSON v. ERCOLE (2009)

In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), dated January 31, 2008, which, without a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

 The appellant's contention that a federal detention warrant compelling him to remain in custody has lapsed is based upon material dehors the record (see People ex rel. Roache v. Connell, 31 A.D.3d 1199, 818 N.Y.S.2d 723).   Moreover, habeas corpus is an inappropriate remedy for addressing the appellant's other contention that a good time allowance was improperly withheld from him (see People ex rel. Barnes v. Allard, 25 A.D.3d 893, 894, 807 N.Y.S.2d 688;  People ex rel. Richardson v. West, 24 A.D.3d 996, 997, 806 N.Y.S.2d 276).   Accordingly, the appellant failed to establish that he would be entitled to an immediate release from custody if a writ of habeas corpus were granted (see People ex rel. Kaplan v. Commissioner of Correction of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 648, 467 N.Y.S.2d 566, 454 N.E.2d 1309;  People ex rel. DeFlumer v. Strack, 212 A.D.2d 555, 623 N.Y.S.2d 1).