People v Wright

Annotate this Case
People v Wright 2022 NY Slip Op 03012 Decided on May 4, 2022 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 May 4, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P.
SHERI S. ROMAN
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
WILLIAM G. FORD, JJ.
2019-10651
(Ind. No. 180/18)

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

v

Daniel Wright, appellant.



Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Lynn W. L. Fahey of counsel), for appellant.

Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Deborah A. Brenner and Kevin Osowski of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Douglas Wong, J.), imposed November 30, 2018, upon his convictions of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty. 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 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 id.; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606).

DUFFY, J.P., ROMAN, MALTESE and FORD, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Maria T. Fasulo

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.