People v Nelmes

Annotate this Case
People v Nelmes 2012 NY Slip Op 07131 Decided on October 24, 2012 Appellate Division, Second 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 on October 24, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
RANDALL T. ENG, P.J.
PETER B. SKELOS
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
2011-04671
(Ind. No. 12/05)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Roy E. Nelmes, appellant.




Thomas N.N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Steven Levine of
counsel), for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y.
(Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel),
for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the County Court, Dutchess County (Greller, J.), imposed April 5, 2011, which, upon his conviction of rape in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, imposed a period of postrelease supervision in addition to the determinate term of imprisonment previously imposed by the same court (Hayes, J.) on March 10, 2005. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).
ENG, P.J., SKELOS, CHAMBERS and SGROI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

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.