People v. Kessler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kessler

31 A.D.3d 786, 818 N.Y.S.2d 485

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

DecidedJuly 25, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 31 A.D.3d 786 (People v. Kessler) 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. Kessler, 31 A.D.3d 786, 818 N.Y.S.2d 485 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the [787]*787defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered May 13, 2003, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, 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 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]).

The defendant has raised no nonfrivolous issues in his supplemental pro se brief. The defendant’s claim that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel in connection with this appeal cannot be addressed on this appeal (see People v Bachert, 69 NY2d 593 [1987]). Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro, Rivera and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the [787]*787defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered May 13, 2003, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, 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 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]).

The defendant has raised no nonfrivolous issues in his supplemental pro se brief. The defendant’s claim that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel in connection with this appeal cannot be addressed on this appeal (see People v Bachert, 69 NY2d 593 [1987]). Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro, Rivera and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.3d 786, 818 N.Y.S.2d 485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kessler-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack