People v. Thorpe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Thorpe

302 A.D.2d 617, 755 N.Y.S.2d 642

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 302 A.D.2d 617 (People v. Thorpe) 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. Thorpe, 302 A.D.2d 617, 755 N.Y.S.2d 642 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate a decision and order of this Court, dated November 13, 1995 (People v Thorpe, 221 AD2d 491 [1995]), affirming a sentence of the County Court, Orange County, imposed March 5, 1993, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

Ordered that the application is granted to the extent that the appellant is granted leave to serve and file a brief on the issue of whether the submission of an annotated verdict sheet by the County Court, Orange County, constituted reversible error; and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the application: Arza Rayches Feldman, 300 Rabro Dr., Hauppauge, N.Y. 11788 and it is further,

Ordered that assigned counsel shall prosecute the application expeditiously in accordance with this Court’s rules (see 22 [618]*618NYCKR 670.1 et seq.) and written directions. Prudenti, P.J., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate a decision and order of this Court, dated November 13, 1995 (People v Thorpe, 221 AD2d 491 [1995]), affirming a sentence of the County Court, Orange County, imposed March 5, 1993, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

Ordered that the application is granted to the extent that the appellant is granted leave to serve and file a brief on the issue of whether the submission of an annotated verdict sheet by the County Court, Orange County, constituted reversible error; and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the application: Arza Rayches Feldman, 300 Rabro Dr., Hauppauge, N.Y. 11788 and it is further,

Ordered that assigned counsel shall prosecute the application expeditiously in accordance with this Court’s rules (see 22 [618]*618NYCKR 670.1 et seq.) and written directions. Prudenti, P.J., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 A.D.2d 617, 755 N.Y.S.2d 642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-thorpe-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack