People v. Kapoor

2017 NY Slip Op 2818
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 12, 2017
Docket2016-05652
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 2818 (People v. Kapoor) 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. Kapoor, 2017 NY Slip Op 2818 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

People v Kapoor (2017 NY Slip Op 02818)
People v Kapoor
2017 NY Slip Op 02818
Decided on April 12, 2017
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on April 12, 2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SHERI S. ROMAN
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

2016-05652

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Aman Kapoor, appellant. (S.C.I. No. 14-01064)


Richard L. Herzfeld, New York, NY, for appellant.

Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, NY (Jennifer Spencer and Laurie Sapakoff of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), rendered December 1, 2015, convicting him of attempted criminal sexual act in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738). Counsel has informed this Court that the defendant has not authorized counsel to raise any issue that would allow him to withdraw his plea. Upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see id.; People v Rhodes, 128 AD3d 1100; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN, HINDS-RADIX and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Rhodes
128 A.D.3d 1100 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Gonzalez
393 N.E.2d 987 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
People v. Paige
54 A.D.2d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
In re Giovanni S.
89 A.D.3d 252 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 2818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kapoor-nyappdiv-2017.