People v. James

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. James

16 A.D.3d 598, 790 N.Y.S.2d 893, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2965

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.3d 598 (People v. James) 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. James, 16 A.D.3d 598, 790 N.Y.S.2d 893, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J), both rendered July 24, 2002, convicting him of burglary in the second degree under indictment No. 01-934 and attempted burglary in the second degree under indictment No. 01-1140, 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 nonfrivolous 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 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Prudenti, P.J., Schmidt, Santucci, Luciano and Spolzino, 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 Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J), both rendered July 24, 2002, convicting him of burglary in the second degree under indictment No. 01-934 and attempted burglary in the second degree under indictment No. 01-1140, 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 nonfrivolous 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 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Prudenti, P.J., Schmidt, Santucci, Luciano and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 598, 790 N.Y.S.2d 893, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-james-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack