People v. Gina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gina

170 A.D.2d 459

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

DecidedFebruary 4, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 170 A.D.2d 459 (People v. Gina) 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. Gina, 170 A.D.2d 459 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Baker, J.), rendered November 9, 1987, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), grand larceny in the second degree, and conspiracy in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, 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 [460]*460leave 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). Moreover, we have considered the issues raised by the defendant in his supplemental pro se brief and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Lawrence and Rosenblatt, 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 County Court, Nassau County (Baker, J.), rendered November 9, 1987, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), grand larceny in the second degree, and conspiracy in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, 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 [460]*460leave 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). Moreover, we have considered the issues raised by the defendant in his supplemental pro se brief and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Lawrence and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.D.2d 459, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gina-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack