People v. Kwame W.

2020 NY Slip Op 4596, 127 N.Y.S.3d 282, 186 A.D.3d 753
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 19, 2020
Docket2018-13941
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 4596 (People v. Kwame W.) 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. Kwame W., 2020 NY Slip Op 4596, 127 N.Y.S.3d 282, 186 A.D.3d 753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

People v Kwame W. (2020 NY Slip Op 04596)
People v Kwame W.
2020 NY Slip Op 04596
Decided on August 19, 2020
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 August 19, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
BETSY BARROS
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

2018-13941
2018-13942
2018-13943

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

v

Kwame W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Ind. Nos. 2034/17, 4075/17, 857/18)


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Lynn W. L. Fahey of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from three judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dineen Ann Riviezzo, J.), all rendered October 10, 2018, adjudicating him a youthful offender, upon his pleas of guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under Indictment No. 2034/17, robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 4075/17, and robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 857/18, and imposing sentences. 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 judgments are 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), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on the appeals. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see id.; 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., DUFFY, BARROS and IANNACCI, 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. 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)
2020 NY Slip Op 4596, 127 N.Y.S.3d 282, 186 A.D.3d 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kwame-w-nyappdiv-2020.