People v. Wade

99 A.D.3d 1028, 952 N.Y.2d 468
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Wade. Read the opinion of the Court — 118 A.D.3d 1370

Opinion

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant’s assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252 [2011]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Angiolillo, J.E, Balkin, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Wade, 99 A.D.3d 1028, 952 N.Y.2d 468 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

99 A.D.3d 1028 (People v. Wade) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Gonzalez
393 N.E.2d 987 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
People v. Paige
54 A.D.2d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
In re Giovanni S.
89 A.D.3d 252 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)