People v. Fenty

100 A.D.3d 653, 952 N.Y.S.2d 899
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Fenty. Read the opinion of the Court — 96 A.D.3d 1075

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered September 13, 2010, convicting him of criminal sexual act in the first 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.

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 [1967]), and we have also reviewed the defendant’s pro se supplemental brief. 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 Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]). Eng, EJ., Florio, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Fenty, 100 A.D.3d 653, 952 N.Y.S.2d 899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

100 A.D.3d 653 (People v. Fenty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Paige
54 A.D.2d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)