Narrative Opinion Summary
The judgment issued by the Supreme Court of New York County on January 30, 1996, has been unanimously affirmed. The court granted the appellant's counsel's application to withdraw, citing Anders v. California and People v. Saunders as precedents. After reviewing the record, the court concurred with the appellant's assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Under CPL 460.20, the defendant retains the right to seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making an application to the Chief Judge or a Justice of the Appellate Division. This application must be submitted within thirty days of receiving the order, with reasonable notice to the respondent. A denial of the application by the initially approached Judge or Justice is considered final, barring subsequent applications to other Judges or Justices. The decision was concurred by Justices Wallach, Nardelli, Rubin, Tom, and Andrias.
Legal Issues Addressed
Finality of Denial in Application for Leave to Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A denial of the application for leave to appeal by the initially approached Judge or Justice is deemed final, preventing any subsequent applications to other Judges or Justices.
Reasoning: A denial of the application by the initially approached Judge or Justice is considered final, barring subsequent applications to other Judges or Justices.
Right to Seek Leave to Appeal under CPL 460.20subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The defendant is informed of the procedural right to seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, which involves a specified application process within a designated timeframe.
Reasoning: Under CPL 460.20, the defendant retains the right to seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making an application to the Chief Judge or a Justice of the Appellate Division.
Withdrawal of Counsel under Anders v. Californiasubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court permitted the appellant's counsel to withdraw after determining that the appeal lacked non-frivolous issues, consistent with the precedent set in Anders v. California.
Reasoning: The court granted the appellant's counsel's application to withdraw, citing Anders v. California and People v. Saunders as precedents.