People v Holcomb

Annotate this Case
People v Holcomb 2013 NY Slip Op 05478 Decided on July 25, 2013 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: July 25, 2013
105119

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,

v

STANLEY D. HOLCOMB SR., Appellant.

Calendar Date: June 6, 2013
Before: Rose, J.P., Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ.


G. Scott Walling, Queensbury, for appellant, and
appellant pro se.
Kevin C. Kortright, District Attorney, Fort Edward
(John J. Carson, Law Intern), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (McKeighan, J.), rendered May 18, 2012, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sexual act in the first degree.

In satisfaction of a 13-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sexual act in the first degree and waived his right to appeal. Under the terms of the plea agreement, defendant was to be sentenced to no less than five but no more than 10 years in prison, to be followed by no less than five but no more than 20 years of postrelease supervision. In accordance therewith, defendant was sentenced to 10 years in prison followed by 15 years of postrelease supervision. He now appeals.

Appellate counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment of representing defendant upon the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal. Based upon our review of the record, counsel's brief and defendant's pro se submission, we agree. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed and counsel's request 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]).

Rose, J.P., Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. [*2]

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.