People v. Denham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Denham

102 A.D.2d 895, 477 N.Y.S.2d 310, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19129

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 25, 1984·Published

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rubin, J.), imposed February 20, 1980, upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second and third degrees, upon a jury verdict. 11 Resentence affirmed. H We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues that could be raised on this 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). Gibbons, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rubin, J.), imposed February 20, 1980, upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second and third degrees, upon a jury verdict. 11 Resentence affirmed. H We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues that could be raised on this 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). Gibbons, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Boyers, JJ., concur.

People v. Denham, 102 A.D.2d 895, 477 N.Y.S.2d 310, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19129 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

102 A.D.2d 895 (People v. Denham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related