People v. Romano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Romano

32 A.D.3d 1053, 820 N.Y.S.2d 534

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

DecidedSeptember 14, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.3d 1053 (People v. Romano) 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. Romano, 32 A.D.3d 1053, 820 N.Y.S.2d 534 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), rendered May 23, 2005, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of robbery in the second degree.

In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the second degree and was sentenced to the minimum permissible prison term of 3½ years, followed by five years of postrelease supervision. On appeal, appellate counsel for defendant seeks to be relieved of his assignment on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues that can be raised on appeal. Based upon our review of the record, assigned counsel’s brief and defendant’s pro se submission, we agree. The judgment is, accordingly, affirmed and the application for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Carpinello, JJ., [1054]*1054concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), rendered May 23, 2005, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of robbery in the second degree.

In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the second degree and was sentenced to the minimum permissible prison term of 3½ years, followed by five years of postrelease supervision. On appeal, appellate counsel for defendant seeks to be relieved of his assignment on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues that can be raised on appeal. Based upon our review of the record, assigned counsel’s brief and defendant’s pro se submission, we agree. The judgment is, accordingly, affirmed and the application for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Carpinello, JJ., [1054]*1054concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.3d 1053, 820 N.Y.S.2d 534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-romano-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack