People v. Simmelkjaer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Simmelkjaer

189 A.D.2d 835, 592 N.Y.S.2d 925, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 319

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 189 A.D.2d 835 (People v. Simmelkjaer) 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. Simmelkjaer, 189 A.D.2d 835, 592 N.Y.S.2d 925, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 319 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from four judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.), all rendered June 20, 1990, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (four counts, one count as to each indictment), upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

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 [836]*836leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

The defendant’s contention in his supplemental pro se brief is frivolous (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from four judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.), all rendered June 20, 1990, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (four counts, one count as to each indictment), upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

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 [836]*836leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

The defendant’s contention in his supplemental pro se brief is frivolous (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 A.D.2d 835, 592 N.Y.S.2d 925, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-simmelkjaer-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack