People v. Prato

146 A.D.2d 588, 536 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 141
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Prato. Read the opinion of the Court — 143 A.D.2d 205

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.), rendered October 29, 1984, convicting him of burglary 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 meritorious 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).

We have reviewed the arguments raised in the defendant’s supplemental pro se brief and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Brown, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Prato, 146 A.D.2d 588, 536 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 141 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

146 A.D.2d 588 (People v. Prato) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)