People v. McLoyd

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McLoyd

185 A.D.2d 949

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

DecidedAugust 24, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 185 A.D.2d 949 (People v. McLoyd) 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. McLoyd, 185 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered May 1, 1991, convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under Indictment No. 2252/90, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered May 1, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court under Indictment No. 1040/ 90 upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Ordered that the judgment and amended judgement 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; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered May 1, 1991, convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under Indictment No. 2252/90, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered May 1, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court under Indictment No. 1040/ 90 upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Ordered that the judgment and amended judgement 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; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 A.D.2d 949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcloyd-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack