People v. Devonish

2021 NY Slip Op 04368, 147 N.Y.S.3d 432, 196 A.D.3d 598
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 14, 2021
Docket2017-12752
StatusPublished

This text of 2021 NY Slip Op 04368 (People v. Devonish) 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. Devonish, 2021 NY Slip Op 04368, 147 N.Y.S.3d 432, 196 A.D.3d 598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

People v Devonish (2021 NY Slip Op 04368)
People v Devonish
2021 NY Slip Op 04368
Decided on July 14, 2021
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on July 14, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

2017-12752

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Tammica R. Devonish, appellant. (S.C.I. No. 2170/17)


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Anna Kou of counsel), for appellant.

Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Danielle S. Fenn of counsel; Lorrie A. Zinno on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Suzanne Melendez, J.), rendered October 23, 2017, convicting her of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738), and upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see id.; Matter Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

RIVERA, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Gonzalez
393 N.E.2d 987 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
People v. Paige
54 A.D.2d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
In re Giovanni S.
89 A.D.3d 252 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 NY Slip Op 04368, 147 N.Y.S.3d 432, 196 A.D.3d 598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-devonish-nyappdiv-2021.