People v. Burnett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Burnett

21 A.D.3d 1148, 800 N.Y.S.2d 852

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

DecidedSeptember 15, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A.D.3d 1148 (People v. Burnett) 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. Burnett, 21 A.D.3d 1148, 800 N.Y.S.2d 852 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Eidens, J.), rendered July 10, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

Defendant waived indictment and pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree as charged in two superior court informations. Pursuant to the negotiated plea agreement, defendant waived his right to appeal and, as agreed, was thereafter sentenced as a second felony offender to concurrent prison terms of 10 years on the robbery charge and 3 to 6 years on the drug charge.

Defense counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment as counsel for defendant on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues that can be raised on appeal. Upon our review of the record, defendant’s correspondence with counsel, as well as counsel’s brief, we agree. Notably, the plea colloquy herein is a model in its detail, clarity and thoroughness. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and defense counsel’s application for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, 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 a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Eidens, J.), rendered July 10, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

Defendant waived indictment and pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree as charged in two superior court informations. Pursuant to the negotiated plea agreement, defendant waived his right to appeal and, as agreed, was thereafter sentenced as a second felony offender to concurrent prison terms of 10 years on the robbery charge and 3 to 6 years on the drug charge.

Defense counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment as counsel for defendant on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues that can be raised on appeal. Upon our review of the record, defendant’s correspondence with counsel, as well as counsel’s brief, we agree. Notably, the plea colloquy herein is a model in its detail, clarity and thoroughness. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and defense counsel’s application for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.3d 1148, 800 N.Y.S.2d 852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-burnett-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack