Opinion
May 27, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Martin, J.).
Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Habeas corpus relief is not appropriate in this instance since the petitioner would not be entitled to immediate release from custody even if his contentions had merit (see, People ex rel. Douglas v Vincent, 50 N.Y.2d 901; People ex rel. Lane v Vincent, 32 N.Y.2d 940).
In any event, the petitioner's contentions are without merit. At the trial giving rise to the petitioner's detention, the trial court had jurisdiction to submit unlawful imprisonment to the jury as a lesser included offense of kidnapping, which was the crime charged in the indictment against the petitioner, even though the court did not submit kidnapping to the jury for its consideration (see, People v Panuccio, 90 A.D.2d 507; People v Buthy, 85 A.D.2d 890; People v Mendez, 63 A.D.2d 69; People v Congilaro, 60 A.D.2d 442). Bracken, J.P., Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.