People v. Warren

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Warren

15 A.D.3d 681, 789 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2038

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.3d 681 (People v. Warren) 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. Warren, 15 A.D.3d 681, 789 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2038 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ambrosio, J.), both rendered March 21, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree under indictment No. 1094/01 and gang assault in the first degree under indictment No. 2425/01, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are 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. Adams, J.E, Cozier, Ritter and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ambrosio, J.), both rendered March 21, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree under indictment No. 1094/01 and gang assault in the first degree under indictment No. 2425/01, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are 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. Adams, J.E, Cozier, Ritter and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.3d 681, 789 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-warren-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack