People v. Rose
91 A.D.3d 798, 936 N.Y.2d 902
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Rose. Read the opinion of the Court — 72 A.D.3d 1341 →
Opinion
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]). Rivera, J.P, Eng, Chambers, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Rose, 91 A.D.3d 798, 936 N.Y.2d 902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).
91 A.D.3d 798 (People v. Rose) — 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)