People v. Hamilton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hamilton

55 A.D.2d 887, 391 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10103

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

DecidedJanuary 25, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 55 A.D.2d 887 (People v. Hamilton) 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. Hamilton, 55 A.D.2d 887, 391 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10103 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

On this appeal from a judgment, rendered on January 21, 1976, in the Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicting defendant on his plea of guilty of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment with a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 10 years, assigned counsel, after conscientiously examining the record has sought leave to withdraw. The application is supported by a brief in compliance with People v Saunders (52 AD2d 833) (see, also, Anders v California, 386 US 738). Counsel has concluded that the record in this case does not reveal any valid appealable issue, and that the appeal is therefore frivolous. Nonetheless, after inquiring of defendant, he has set forth the points the appellant wanted him to make. After a review of the record and proceedings in this case, this court agrees with counsel for appellant that there are no issues to be raised on this appeal that would not be frivolous. Accordingly, the application by counsel to withdraw is granted, and the judgment of conviction is unanimously affirmed. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Birns and Nunez, JJ.

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

On this appeal from a judgment, rendered on January 21, 1976, in the Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicting defendant on his plea of guilty of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment with a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 10 years, assigned counsel, after conscientiously examining the record has sought leave to withdraw. The application is supported by a brief in compliance with People v Saunders (52 AD2d 833) (see, also, Anders v California, 386 US 738). Counsel has concluded that the record in this case does not reveal any valid appealable issue, and that the appeal is therefore frivolous. Nonetheless, after inquiring of defendant, he has set forth the points the appellant wanted him to make. After a review of the record and proceedings in this case, this court agrees with counsel for appellant that there are no issues to be raised on this appeal that would not be frivolous. Accordingly, the application by counsel to withdraw is granted, and the judgment of conviction is unanimously affirmed. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Birns and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.2d 887, 391 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hamilton-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack