People v. Walker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Walker

5 A.D.3d 703, 774 N.Y.S.2d 721

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

DecidedMarch 22, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.3d 703 (People v. Walker) 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. Walker, 5 A.D.3d 703, 774 N.Y.S.2d 721 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered April 15, 2002, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]).

The defendant has not raised any nonfrivolous issues in his supplemental pro se brief. Altman, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered April 15, 2002, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]).

The defendant has not raised any nonfrivolous issues in his supplemental pro se brief. Altman, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 703, 774 N.Y.S.2d 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-walker-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack