People v. Murray

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Murray

188 A.D.2d 558, 591 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14387

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

DecidedDecember 14, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 188 A.D.2d 558 (People v. Murray) 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. Murray, 188 A.D.2d 558, 591 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14387 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered June 19, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon his admission that he had violated a condition thereof, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the third degree, reckless driving, and speeding, upon his plea of guilty.

Ordered that the amended 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; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v [559]*559Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Sullivan, O’Brien, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered June 19, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon his admission that he had violated a condition thereof, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the third degree, reckless driving, and speeding, upon his plea of guilty.

Ordered that the amended 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; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v [559]*559Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Sullivan, O’Brien, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.D.2d 558, 591 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-murray-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack