Court Opinion

ID: 4576682
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-10-14 19:07:55.224464+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:02.769961
License: Public Domain

People v Morris (2020 NY Slip Op 05778)

People v Morris

2020 NY Slip Op 05778

Decided on October 14, 2020

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 14, 2020
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
JEFFREY A. COHEN
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

2019-07570
 (Ind. No. 18-00420)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,
vAnthony Morris, appellant.

Mary Zugibe Raleigh, Warwick, NY, for appellant.
David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (William L. Deprospo, J.), rendered June 4, 2019, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which she moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Under the circumstances of this case, the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738) was sufficient because it addressed the essential issues in the case and, although the brief did not fully analyze the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal or the enforceability of the waiver, the enforceability or unenforceability of the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal makes no practical difference to the Anders outcome (see People v Warney, __ AD3d __, 2020 NY Slip Op 04879 [2d Dept]; People v Murray, 169 AD3d 227, 233). Moreover, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues that could be raised on appeal (see People v Murray, 169 AD3d at 233). Accordingly, counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US at 744; People v Murray, 169 AD3d at 235).
BALKIN, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN, CONNOLLY and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court