People v. Velez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Velez

116 A.D.3d 1077, 983 N.Y.S.2d 873

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

DecidedApril 30, 2014

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 116 A.D.3d 1077 (People v. Velez) 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. Velez, 116 A.D.3d 1077, 983 N.Y.S.2d 873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan, J.), dated February 9, 2011, which denied his motion to be resentenced pursuant to CEL 440.46 on his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, which sentence was originally imposed, upon his plea of guilty, on February 20, 2003. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), in which she moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic; and it is further,

Ordered that assigned counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is denied as academic.

Inasmuch as the maximum term of the defendant’s sentence expired during the pendency of this appeal, “any issues which relate to the length of his sentence are academic” (People v Conklin, 46 AD3d 698, 698 [2007]; see People v Gonzalez, 113 AD3d 792 [2014]). Rivera, J.E, Dickerson, Cohen, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 3088HU).]

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

— Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan, J.), dated February 9, 2011, which denied his motion to be resentenced pursuant to CEL 440.46 on his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, which sentence was originally imposed, upon his plea of guilty, on February 20, 2003. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), in which she moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic; and it is further,

Ordered that assigned counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is denied as academic.

Inasmuch as the maximum term of the defendant’s sentence expired during the pendency of this appeal, “any issues which relate to the length of his sentence are academic” (People v Conklin, 46 AD3d 698, 698 [2007]; see People v Gonzalez, 113 AD3d 792 [2014]). Rivera, J.E, Dickerson, Cohen, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 3088HU).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 A.D.3d 1077, 983 N.Y.S.2d 873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-velez-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack