People v. Daugherty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Daugherty

41 A.D.3d 219, 836 N.Y.S.2d 413

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

DecidedJune 14, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.3d 219 (People v. Daugherty) 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. Daugherty, 41 A.D.3d 219, 836 N.Y.S.2d 413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered September 14, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to a term of one year, held in abeyance pending receipt of a supplemental appellant’s brief, the motion by assigned counsel to be relieved denied without prejudice to renewal, and assigned counsel is directed to serve a supplemental brief within 60 days of this Court’s order.

Counsel submitted a brief pursuant to People v Saunders (52 AD2d 833 [1976]), which makes no mention of the summary denial of defendant’s motion to suppress evidence. Accordingly, counsel is directed to investigate that issue and file a supplemental brief addressing whether the denial of the motion presents any nonfrivolous issues that should be considered on appeal (see People v Diaz, 127 AD2d 511, 512 [1987]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Buckley, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

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

Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered September 14, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to a term of one year, held in abeyance pending receipt of a supplemental appellant’s brief, the motion by assigned counsel to be relieved denied without prejudice to renewal, and assigned counsel is directed to serve a supplemental brief within 60 days of this Court’s order.

Counsel submitted a brief pursuant to People v Saunders (52 AD2d 833 [1976]), which makes no mention of the summary denial of defendant’s motion to suppress evidence. Accordingly, counsel is directed to investigate that issue and file a supplemental brief addressing whether the denial of the motion presents any nonfrivolous issues that should be considered on appeal (see People v Diaz, 127 AD2d 511, 512 [1987]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Buckley, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.3d 219, 836 N.Y.S.2d 413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-daugherty-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack