People v. Aikens

2019 NY Slip Op 4186
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 29, 2019
Docket2017-12415
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 NY Slip Op 4186 (People v. Aikens) 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
People v. Aikens, 2019 NY Slip Op 4186 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

People v Aikens (2019 NY Slip Op 04186)
People v Aikens
2019 NY Slip Op 04186
Decided on May 29, 2019
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on May 29, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
JEFFREY A. COHEN
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

2017-12415
2017-12416

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Thomas Aikens, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 14-00545, 15-00079) John P. Savoca, Yorktown Heights, NY, for appellant.


David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Orange County (Craig S. Brown, J.), both rendered October 17, 2017, convicting him of robbery in the third degree under Indictment No. 14-00545, and attempted robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 15-00079, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on the appeals. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see id.; People v Murray, 169 AD3d 227; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, COHEN and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Gonzalez
393 N.E.2d 987 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
People v. Paige
54 A.D.2d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
In re Giovanni S.
89 A.D.3d 252 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 NY Slip Op 4186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-aikens-nyappdiv-2019.