People v. Puca

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Puca

62 A.D.3d 1028, 878 N.Y.S.2d 909

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

DecidedMay 26, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 62 A.D.3d 1028 (People v. Puca) 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. Puca, 62 A.D.3d 1028, 878 N.Y.S.2d 909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Fitzgibbon, J), rendered September 4, 2003, convicting him of assault in the second degree, driving while intoxicated, attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, and petit larceny, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (MacKenzie, J), rendered February 10, 2004.

Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgment 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 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Miller, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ, concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Fitzgibbon, J), rendered September 4, 2003, convicting him of assault in the second degree, driving while intoxicated, attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, and petit larceny, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (MacKenzie, J), rendered February 10, 2004.

Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgment 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 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Miller, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 1028, 878 N.Y.S.2d 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-puca-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack