People v. Hargrove

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hargrove

31 A.D.3d 408, 817 N.Y.S.2d 512

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

DecidedJuly 5, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.3d 408 (People v. Hargrove) 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. Hargrove, 31 A.D.3d 408, 817 N.Y.S.2d 512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), dated January 20, 2005, which, without a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), in which he moves to be relieved of the assignment to prosecute this appeal.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

[409]*409The appeal must be dismissed because the order appealed from was superseded by a subsequent order of the same court dated March 24, 2005, which, after a hearing, designated the defendant a level two sex offender (see People v Peterkin, 5 AD3d 751 [2004]).

Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted. Adams, J.P., Goldstein, Fisher and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), dated January 20, 2005, which, without a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), in which he moves to be relieved of the assignment to prosecute this appeal.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

[409]*409The appeal must be dismissed because the order appealed from was superseded by a subsequent order of the same court dated March 24, 2005, which, after a hearing, designated the defendant a level two sex offender (see People v Peterkin, 5 AD3d 751 [2004]).

Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted. Adams, J.P., Goldstein, Fisher and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.3d 408, 817 N.Y.S.2d 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hargrove-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack