People v. Shaw

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Shaw

301 A.D.2d 751, 752 N.Y.S.2d 916, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 94

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 301 A.D.2d 751 (People v. Shaw) 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. Shaw, 301 A.D.2d 751, 752 N.Y.S.2d 916, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 94 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Cardona, P.J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), rendered September 28, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to a prison term of 4 to 12 years. Defense counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment as counsel for defendant on the ground that no nonfrivolous issues can be raised on appeal. We disagree. Our review of the record and defense counsel’s brief reveals the existence of potential nonfrivolous issues of “arguable merit” (People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, lv denied 67 NY2d 650), including whether defendant’s plea was voluntary. Accordingly, defense counsel’s application to be relieved of his assignment is granted and new counsel will be assigned to address any issues that the record may disclose (see People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633; People v Cruwys, supra).

Mercure, Spain, Carpinello and Kane, 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

Cardona, P.J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), rendered September 28, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to a prison term of 4 to 12 years. Defense counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment as counsel for defendant on the ground that no nonfrivolous issues can be raised on appeal. We disagree. Our review of the record and defense counsel’s brief reveals the existence of potential nonfrivolous issues of “arguable merit” (People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, lv denied 67 NY2d 650), including whether defendant’s plea was voluntary. Accordingly, defense counsel’s application to be relieved of his assignment is granted and new counsel will be assigned to address any issues that the record may disclose (see People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633; People v Cruwys, supra).

Mercure, Spain, Carpinello and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is withheld, application to be relieved of assignment granted and new counsel to be assigned.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 751, 752 N.Y.S.2d 916, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-shaw-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack