People v. Rodriguez

167 N.Y.S.3d 852, 2022 NY Slip Op 03776
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 9, 2022·No. 112995·Published

Opinion

People v Rodriguez (2022 NY Slip Op 03776)
People v Rodriguez
2022 NY Slip Op 03776
Decided on June 9, 2022
Appellate Division, Third Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered:June 9, 2022

112995

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Michael Rodriguez, Appellant.


Calendar Date:May 20, 2022
Before:Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ.

Tina Sodhi, Alternate Public Defender, Albany (Steven M. Sharp of counsel), for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Christopher D. Horn of counsel), for respondent.



Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Carter, J.), rendered March 30, 2021, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to a superior court information charging him with attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and purportedly waived the right to appeal. County Court thereafter sentenced defendant to 1½ years in prison, to be followed by 1½ years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.

Appellate counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment of representing defendant on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues that may be raised on appeal. Based upon our review of the record, we find issues of arguable merit pertaining to the validity of the waiver of the right to appeal that may impact other issues that may be raised, such as the severity of the sentence imposed (see People v Stratton, 201 AD3d 1201, 1202 [2022]). Accordingly, without passing judgment on the ultimate merit of these issues, we grant counsel's application for leave to withdraw and assign new counsel to address these issues and any others that the record may disclose (see People v Beaty, 22 NY3d 490, 492-493 [2014]; People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633, 638-639 [2001]; see generally People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, 980 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]).

Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and McShan, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is withheld, application to be relieved of assignment granted and new counsel to be assigned.



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

People v. Rodriguez, 167 N.Y.S.3d 852, 2022 NY Slip Op 03776 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2022).

167 N.Y.S.3d 852 (People v. Rodriguez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Stokes
744 N.E.2d 1153 (New York Court of Appeals, 2001)
People v. Beaty
5 N.E.3d 983 (New York Court of Appeals, 2014)
People v. Cruwys
113 A.D.2d 979 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
People v. Stratton
159 N.Y.S.3d 763 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)