People v. Rogers

33 A.D.3d 732, 821 N.Y.S.2d 914
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Rogers. Read the opinion of the Court — 8 A.D.3d 888

Opinion

Application by the appellant pro se for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated June 6, 2005 (People v Rogers, 19 AD3d 437 [2005]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered February 6, 2003.

Ordered that the appellant is granted leave to serve and file a brief on the issues of whether trial counsel became a witness against the defendant when he submitted his pro se motion pursuant to CPL 330.30, and whether the trial court should have assigned him a new attorney in connection with CPL 330.30 motion; and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to County Law § 722, the following named attorney is assigned as counsel: Joseph Faraguna, Esq. EO. Box 122 Sag Harbor, N.Y. 11963, and it is further,

Ordered that assigned counsel shall serve and file a brief expeditiously in accordance with this court’s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1 et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

[733]*733Ordered that the application is held in abeyance in the interim. Krausman, J.R, Fisher, Lifson and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Rogers, 33 A.D.3d 732, 821 N.Y.S.2d 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

33 A.D.3d 732 (People v. Rogers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Rogers
19 A.D.3d 437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)