People v. Fontanez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fontanez

139 A.D.2d 526, 526 N.Y.S.2d 799, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3699

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

DecidedApril 4, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.D.2d 526 (People v. Fontanez) 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. Fontanez, 139 A.D.2d 526, 526 N.Y.S.2d 799, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3699 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Rockland County (Edelstein, J.), both rendered October 25, 1984, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree under indictment No. 84-102, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree under indictment No. 84-112, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on 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).

We note that contrary to the parties’ statements on appeal, the original court file and sentencing minutes filed on June 3, [527]*5271985, demonstrate that the defendant was indeed sentenced on both indictment No. 84-112 and indictment No. 84-102. Mollen, P. J., Lawrence, Eiber, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Rockland County (Edelstein, J.), both rendered October 25, 1984, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree under indictment No. 84-102, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree under indictment No. 84-112, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on 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).

We note that contrary to the parties’ statements on appeal, the original court file and sentencing minutes filed on June 3, [527]*5271985, demonstrate that the defendant was indeed sentenced on both indictment No. 84-112 and indictment No. 84-102. Mollen, P. J., Lawrence, Eiber, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.2d 526, 526 N.Y.S.2d 799, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3699, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fontanez-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack