In re Amber EE.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Amber EE.

245 A.D.2d 895, 666 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13604

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 24, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 245 A.D.2d 895 (In re Amber EE.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Amber EE., 245 A.D.2d 895, 666 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Broome County (Ray, J.), entered October 3, 1996, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, to find respondent in violation of a prior order of protection.

Respondent admitted to violating an order of protection directing that he have no contact with Amber EE. and was sentenced, as agreed, to four months in jail. Respondent’s counsel seeks to be relieved of representing respondent on appeal on the basis that no nonfrivolous issues exist. Upon our review of the record and brief submitted by respondent’s counsel, we agree. Consequently, counsel’s application to be relieved of her assignment is granted (see, Matter of Dart v Howell, 237 AD2d 825; see also, Anders v California, 386 US 738).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Carpinello, JJ. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Broome County (Ray, J.), entered October 3, 1996, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, to find respondent in violation of a prior order of protection.

Respondent admitted to violating an order of protection directing that he have no contact with Amber EE. and was sentenced, as agreed, to four months in jail. Respondent’s counsel seeks to be relieved of representing respondent on appeal on the basis that no nonfrivolous issues exist. Upon our review of the record and brief submitted by respondent’s counsel, we agree. Consequently, counsel’s application to be relieved of her assignment is granted (see, Matter of Dart v Howell, 237 AD2d 825; see also, Anders v California, 386 US 738).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Carpinello, JJ. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 895, 666 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-amber-ee-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack