From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Saunders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 27, 1976
52 A.D.2d 833 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Summary

In People v. Saunders (52 A.D.2d 833) this court established the procedure to be followed when an appeal is deemed wholly frivolous.

Summary of this case from People v. Hunter

Opinion

May 27, 1976


Motion by assigned counsel to be relieved and to have alternate counsel assigned on this appeal denied without prejudice. Appellant's time to perfect this appeal enlarged to the September 1976 Term. Assigned counsel asks to be relieved, stating that his review of the trial minutes does not reveal a valid issue to be raised on this appeal. Appellant joins in his counsel's application, and requests that a new attorney be assigned. The moving papers submitted here are insufficient to warrant the granting of the requested relief. The Supreme Court, in Anders v California ( 386 U.S. 738), established the procedure to be followed in this type of situation. Upon finding his case to be wholly frivolous, after a conscientious examination of the record, counsel should so advise the court and request permission to withdraw. Such request should be accompanied by a brief reciting the underlying facts and highlighting anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The brief should be prepared in accordance with the applicable rules of this court, and placed on the Appeals Calendar within the time period prescribed for perfecting the appeal. Appellant should be furnished with a copy of the brief, and given an opportunity to raise any points he chooses. The court will then examine all of the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. If such a finding is made, the court will grant counsel's request to withdraw, and affirm the judgment of conviction. But, if the court finds any legal points arguable on their merits, it will afford the appellant the assistance of new counsel to argue the appeal. In certain limited classes of cases (e.g., where the sentence imposed was excessive) the interests of justice may require an immediate disposition of the appeal by the court in order to avoid the delay the assignment of a new attorney would necessitate. Time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the September 1976 Term of this court.

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Birns, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Saunders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 27, 1976
52 A.D.2d 833 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

In People v. Saunders (52 A.D.2d 833) this court established the procedure to be followed when an appeal is deemed wholly frivolous.

Summary of this case from People v. Hunter
Case details for

People v. Saunders

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK v. BERNARD SAUNDERS

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 27, 1976

Citations

52 A.D.2d 833 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Giovanni S. (anonymous).Admin. for Children's Serv.

The United States Supreme Court in Anders set forth a procedure, subsequently adopted by the New York State…

In Matter of Giovanni S. v. Jasmin A.

The United States Supreme Court in Anders set forth a procedure, subsequently adopted by the New York State…