People v Derry

Annotate this Case
People v Derry 2013 NY Slip Op 04021 Decided on June 5, 2013 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 June 5, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
SANDRA L. SGROI
SYLVIA HINDS-RADIX, JJ.
2012-07456
2012-07458

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

v

Anne F. Derry, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 12-00164, 12-00206)




Michele Marte-Indzonka, Newburgh, N.Y., for appellant.
Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y.
(Elizabeth L. Guinup and Andrew R.
Kass of counsel), for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), both rendered June 28, 2012, convicting her of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol (two counts; one count under Indictment No. 12-00164 and one count under Indictment No. 12-00206), upon her pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which she moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

ORDERED that the judgments are 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 the appeals. 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).
SKELOS, J.P., CHAMBERS, SGROI and HINDS-RADIX, 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.