People v. Singh

190 N.Y.S.3d 469, 218 A.D.3d 500, 2023 NY Slip Op 03712
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 5, 2023
DocketDocket No. 74D/20
StatusPublished

This text of 190 N.Y.S.3d 469 (People v. Singh) 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. Singh, 190 N.Y.S.3d 469, 218 A.D.3d 500, 2023 NY Slip Op 03712 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

People v Singh (2023 NY Slip Op 03712)
People v Singh
2023 NY Slip Op 03712
Decided on July 5, 2023
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on July 5, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
BARRY E. WARHIT, JJ.

2020-06163
(Docket No. 74D/20)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Gurbaksh Singh, appellant.


Judah Maltz, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant.

Anne T. Donnelly, District Attorney, Mineola, NY (Tammy J. Smiley of counsel; Matthew C. Frankel on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Teresa Corrigan, J.), rendered July 24, 2020, convicting him of disorderly conduct, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal from the judgment. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see id.; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

DILLON, J.P., CONNOLLY, CHAMBERS and WARHIT, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Maria T. Fasulo

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Haynesworth
2026 NY Slip Op 01225 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190 N.Y.S.3d 469, 218 A.D.3d 500, 2023 NY Slip Op 03712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-singh-nyappdiv-2023.