People v Russom

Annotate this Case
People v Russom 2010 NY Slip Op 06724 [76 AD3d 1142] September 30, 2010 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, October 27, 2010

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Amanda Russom, Appellant.

—[*1] John J. Goodman Jr., Greenwich, for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Steven M. Sharp of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lamont, J.), rendered July 20, 2009 in Albany County, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

After being indicted on one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, defendant was released on bail and executed a written Parker admonishment. Defendant ultimately pleaded guilty to attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree on the understanding that she would be sentenced as a second felony drug offender to a prison term of three years and postrelease supervision of two years, to run concurrently to the sentence imposed in a separate proceeding. She further waived her right to appeal and, reinforcing her earlier Parker warnings, was told that her failure to appear for sentencing could result in an enhanced sentence of up to eight years of imprisonment to be followed by postrelease supervision. Defendant did not appear for sentencing, and Supreme Court sentenced her in absentia to a prison term of five years to be followed by postrelease supervision of three years. She now appeals.

Appellate counsel for defendant now seeks to be relieved of his assignment, arguing that no nonfrivolous appellate issues exist. Upon our review of the record, we agree. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed and counsel's application for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, 980 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]). [*2]

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Malone Jr., Stein and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.