Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York ex rel. Dwayne CHAPMAN, Appellant, v. Darwin LaCLAIR, as Superintendent of Franklin Correctional Facility, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered September 5, 2008 in Franklin County, which denied petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.
Petitioner is currently serving a lengthy term of imprisonment as a result of his conviction of the crimes of attempted murder in the second degree, two counts of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. His conviction was affirmed on appeal (People v. Chapman, 220 A.D.2d 210, 631 N.Y.S.2d 838 [1995], lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 903, 641 N.Y.S.2d 233, 663 N.E.2d 1263 [1995] ). Petitioner subsequently brought this proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus claiming that the indictment was jurisdictionally defective. Supreme Court denied the application without a hearing and this appeal ensued.
We affirm. Habeas corpus is not the appropriate remedy for raising claims that could have been asserted on direct appeal or in the context of a CPL article 440 motion, even if they are jurisdictional in nature (see People ex rel. Fulton v. Lape, 61 A.D.3d 1227, 876 N.Y.S.2d 665 [2009]; People ex rel. Forsythe v. Poole, 56 A.D.3d 1239, 1239, 866 N.Y.S.2d 896 [2008], lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 701, 876 N.Y.S.2d 348, 904 N.E.2d 503 [2009] ). On the appeal of his conviction, defendant could have challenged the validity of the indictment and apparently did so in an unsuccessful CPL article 440 motion. In light of this, Supreme Court properly denied petitioner's application. Under the circumstances presented, we find no reason to depart from traditional orderly procedure (see People ex rel. Moore v. Connolly, 56 A.D.3d 847, 848, 867 N.Y.S.2d 735 [2008], lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 701, 876 N.Y.S.2d 348, 904 N.E.2d 503 [2009] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: July 16, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)