People v. Whitehead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Whitehead

186 A.D.2d 161

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

DecidedSeptember 14, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 161 (People v. Whitehead) 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. Whitehead, 186 A.D.2d 161 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from (1) an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.), rendered January 24, 1989, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree under Indictment No. 399/85, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (Meyerson, J.), rendered December 6, 1988, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree under Indictment No. 7815/85.

Ordered that the amended 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; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from (1) an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.), rendered January 24, 1989, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree under Indictment No. 399/85, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (Meyerson, J.), rendered December 6, 1988, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree under Indictment No. 7815/85.

Ordered that the amended 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; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-whitehead-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack