People v. Deprosperis

126 A.D.3d 997, 7 N.Y.S.3d 194
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 25, 2015
Docket2013-05930ON MOTION
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 126 A.D.3d 997 (People v. Deprosperis) 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. Deprosperis, 126 A.D.3d 997, 7 N.Y.S.3d 194 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Capeci, J.), rendered May 9, 2013, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

Ordered that the motion of Charles O. Lederman for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted, and he is directed to turn over *998 all papers in his possession to the appellant’s new counsel assigned herein; and it is further,

Ordered that Marianne Karas, 980 Broadway, Suite 324, Thornwood, N.Y. 10594 is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is directed to furnish a copy of the certified transcript of the proceedings to the appellant’s new assigned counsel; and it is further,

Ordered that new counsel shall serve and file a brief on behalf of the appellant within 90 days of the date of this decision and order on motion and the respondent shall serve and file its brief within 30 days after the brief on behalf of the appellant is served and filed. By prior decision and order on motion of this Court, the appellant was granted leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, with the appeal to be heard on the original papers, including a certified transcript of the proceedings, and on the briefs of the parties, who were directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other.

The brief submitted by the appellant’s counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738) was deficient because it failed to contain an adequate statement of facts and failed to analyze potential appellate issues or highlight facts in the record that might arguably support the appeal (see People v McNair, 110 AD3d 742 [2013]; People v Singleton, 101 AD3d 909, 910 [2012]; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 256 [2011]). The statement of facts did not review, in any detail, the court’s advisements to the defendant regarding the rights he was waiving, the inquiries made of the defendant to ensure that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered, or the defendant’s responses to any of those advisements and inquiries (see People v Sedita, 113 AD3d 638, 639-640 [2014]). In addition, it did not provide any detail regarding the defendant’s factual admission as to the crime charged (see id.). Moreover, although assigned counsel concluded that the defendant’s plea of guilty was voluntarily entered, he did not discuss the basis for this conclusion, and made no references to the transcript of the plea hearing or to relevant legal authority in his analysis (see id.). Since the brief did not demonstrate that assigned counsel fulfilled his obligations under Anders v California, we must assign new counsel to represent the appellant (see People v McNair, 110 AD3d 742 [2013]; People v Singleton, 101 AD3d at 910; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d at 258).

Rivera, J.R, Hall, Roman, Cohen and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Rodrigues
2024 NY Slip Op 03692 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Petrangelo
216 A.D.3d 1181 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Wright
177 N.Y.S.3d 330 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Holley
2021 NY Slip Op 02314 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Persaud
2020 NY Slip Op 05940 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Santos
2020 NY Slip Op 1193 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Morales
2020 NY Slip Op 1188 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Velez
2019 NY Slip Op 7800 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Beatty
2019 NY Slip Op 5141 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Cummings
2019 NY Slip Op 4399 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Smith
2019 NY Slip Op 1801 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Solomon
2018 NY Slip Op 4575 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Delarosa
2018 NY Slip Op 4338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Polk
2018 NY Slip Op 3549 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Cortez
2018 NY Slip Op 2643 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Contreras
2018 NY Slip Op 2195 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. James
2018 NY Slip Op 1331 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Friend
2017 NY Slip Op 8683 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Osorio-Rivera
2017 NY Slip Op 8696 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Adams
2017 NY Slip Op 7267 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
126 A.D.3d 997, 7 N.Y.S.3d 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-deprosperis-nyappdiv-2015.