People v. Tompkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tompkins

99 A.D.2d 473, 470 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16655

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

DecidedJanuary 3, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.2d 473 (People v. Tompkins) 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. Tompkins, 99 A.D.2d 473, 470 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16655 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals by defendant from three judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.), all rendered March 25, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and burglary in the second and third degrees, upon pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. Judgments affirmed. We have considered and rejected defendant’s pro se contention of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious grounds which could be raised on these appeals. 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). Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Weinstein and Brown, JJ., concur,

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

Appeals by defendant from three judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.), all rendered March 25, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and burglary in the second and third degrees, upon pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. Judgments affirmed. We have considered and rejected defendant’s pro se contention of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious grounds which could be raised on these appeals. 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). Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Weinstein and Brown, JJ., concur,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.2d 473, 470 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tompkins-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack