People v. Frank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Frank

275 A.D.2d 720, 713 N.Y.S.2d 475, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9131

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

DecidedSeptember 11, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 720 (People v. Frank) 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. Frank, 275 A.D.2d 720, 713 N.Y.S.2d 475, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9131 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered March 19, 1998, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the first degree and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to [721]*721withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered March 19, 1998, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the first degree and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to [721]*721withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 720, 713 N.Y.S.2d 475, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frank-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack