People v. Parrilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Parrilla

2 A.D.3d 754, 768 N.Y.S.2d 646

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

DecidedDecember 22, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.3d 754 (People v. Parrilla) 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. Parrilla, 2 A.D.3d 754, 768 N.Y.S.2d 646 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered February 5, 2002, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court (Byrne, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condi[755]*755tion thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

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 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Santucci, J.P., Goldstein, Schmidt and Cozier, 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, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered February 5, 2002, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court (Byrne, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condi[755]*755tion thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

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 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Santucci, J.P., Goldstein, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.3d 754, 768 N.Y.S.2d 646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-parrilla-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack