People v. Turner

2019 NY Slip Op 3088

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: April 24, 2019
• Docket: 2012-09704
• Status: Published

Opinion

People v Turner (2019 NY Slip Op 03088)

People v Turner

2019 NY Slip Op 03088

Decided on April 24, 2019

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 April 24, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P.
ROBERT J. MILLER
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.

2012-09704

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

v

Duval Turner, appellant. (S.C.I. No. 2245/12)

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Lynn W. L. Fahey of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (John M. Castellano and Johnnette Traill of counsel; Kristin Rainis on the brief), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dorothy Chin-Brandt, J.), rendered October 1, 2012, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, 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.

Under the circumstances of this case, the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738) was sufficient because it addressed the essential issues in the case and, although the brief did not analyze the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal or the enforceability of the waiver, the enforceability or unenforceability of the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal makes no practical difference to the eventual Anders outcome (see People v Murray, 169 AD3d 227). Moreover, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal (see id.). Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see Anders v California, 386 US at 744; People v Murray, 169 AD3d 227; People v Walker, 157 AD3d 726, 726-727).

MASTRO, J.P., MILLER, DUFFY and LASALLE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court