People v Goodine

Annotate this Case
People v Goodine 2017 NY Slip Op 07138 Decided on October 11, 2017 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 11, 2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P.
L. PRISCILLA HALL
JEFFREY A. COHEN
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.
2015-12678
2015-12679

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

v

Daniel Goodine, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 315/13, 6177/13) Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY, for appellant.



Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Solomon Neubort of counsel; Robert Ho on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), both rendered November 25, 2015, convicting him of robbery in the third degree under Indictment No. 315/13, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 6177/13, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. 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 defendant.

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 id.; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

MASTRO, J.P., HALL, COHEN and IANNACCI, 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.