People v. Tate

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tate

296 A.D.2d 511, 745 N.Y.S.2d 476, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7530

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Tate. Read the opinion of the Court — 275 A.D.2d 380 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 15, 2002·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered October 18, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. o

[512]*512Ordered that the judgment is 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 leave 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). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Goldstein, Luciano and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered October 18, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. o

[512]*512Ordered that the judgment is 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 leave 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). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Goldstein, Luciano and Cozier, JJ., concur.

People v. Tate, 296 A.D.2d 511, 745 N.Y.S.2d 476, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7530 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

296 A.D.2d 511 (People v. Tate) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related