People v. Arrington

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Arrington

271 A.D.2d 540, 706 N.Y.S.2d 346, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3999

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

DecidedApril 10, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 540 (People v. Arrington) 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. Arrington, 271 A.D.2d 540, 706 N.Y.S.2d 346, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3999 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered July 23, 1998, convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 98-00188, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered July 23, 1998, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, upon her admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her prior conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under Superior Court Information No. 97-00694.

[541]*541Ordered that the judgment and amended judgment are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Joy, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered July 23, 1998, convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 98-00188, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered July 23, 1998, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, upon her admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her prior conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under Superior Court Information No. 97-00694.

[541]*541Ordered that the judgment and amended judgment are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Joy, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 540, 706 N.Y.S.2d 346, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3999, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-arrington-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack