People v. Cruwys
| Citation | 113 A.D.2d 979,493 N.Y.S.2d 653 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Paul S. CRUWYS, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 19 September 1985 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
William F. Ryan, Albany, for appellant.
Sol Greenberg, Albany County Dist. Atty., Albany (George H. Barber, Albany, of counsel), for respondent.
Before KANE, J.P., and MAIN, YESAWICH, LEVINE and HARVEY, JJ.
(1) Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County, rendered March 21, 1984, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree, and (2) motion to dismiss appeal as frivolous.
Defendant was indicted for criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. As part of a plea agreement whereby County Court was to sentence defendant to 2 to 4 years' imprisonment, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree. On March 21, 1984, defendant was sentenced to a prison term of 2 to 4 years, which he is currently serving. On this appeal, the sole issue raised by defendant is that the sentence is excessive and should be modified.
Defendant was permitted to plead guilty to the first count of the two-count indictment and was sentenced in strict accordance with the negotiated plea bargain. Since the sentencing court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant, we will not disturb the sentence imposed (see, People v. Donnelly, 103 A.D.2d 941, 942-943, 479 N.Y.S.2d 786).
In connection with this appeal, a motion was made by the People to dismiss the appeal as frivolous. We deny that motion, which was opposed by assigned counsel, but take this occasion to review the procedure to be followed in a criminal appeal which assigned counsel believes to be frivolous. In the past, we have followed the guidelines set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Anders v. California 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493; see, People v. Kastenhuber, 94 A.D.2d 932, and we are satisfied that the interests of indigent defendants are protected by that procedure. For the benefit of assigned counsel, we briefly restate the governing principles and rules to be followed.
After assignment, counsel should promptly take steps to obtain the stenographic transcripts and to consult with his client and with trial counsel. If counsel determines, after making a diligent and conscientious examination of the record, that the appeal is frivolous, he may so advise the court and make application...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In the Matter of Giovanni S. (anonymous).Admin. For Children's Serv.
...as well as with trial counsel ( see People v. Stokes, 95 N.Y.2d at 637, 722 N.Y.S.2d 217, 744 N.E.2d 1153, citing People v. Cruwys, 113 A.D.2d 979, 980, 493 N.Y.S.2d 653; People v. Gonzalez, 47 N.Y.2d at 610–611, 419 N.Y.S.2d 913, 393 N.E.2d 987). Further, assigned counsel “must master the ......
-
People v. Bowman
...the record, we agree and grant counsel's application to be relieved of his assignment on that appeal ( see People v. Cruwys, 113 A.D.2d 979, 980, 493 N.Y.S.2d 653 [1985], lv. denied 67 N.Y.2d 650, 499 N.Y.S.2d 1046, 490 N.E.2d 562 [1986] ). ORDERED that the judgment rendered July 9, 2009 af......
-
People v. Jones
...order is therefore affirmed and defense counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see People v. Cruwys, 113 A.D.2d 979, 980, 493 N.Y.S.2d 653 [1985], lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 650, 499 N.Y.S.2d 1046, 490 N.E.2d 562 [1986] ; see generally People v. Beaty, 22 N.Y.3d 490, 98......
-
Merritt v. Berbary
...so that he may be given an opportunity to study the brief and raise other arguments pro se if he so chooses. People v. Cruwys, 113 A.D.2d 979 (App. Div. 3d Dept. 1985), lv. denied, 67 N.Y.2d 650 (N.Y. 1986). If the appellate court finds that, based on the Anders brief, any appeal would be "......