People v Murillo (Yubeiker)
Annotate this CaseDecided on February 21, 2020
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, BERNICE D. SIEGAL, JJ
2017-1814 Q CR
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
against
Yubeiker Murillo, Appellant.
New York City Legal Aid Society (Kristina Schwarz of counsel), for appellant. Queens County District Attorney (John M. Castellano and Johnnette Traill of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Danielle Hartman, J.), rendered August 4, 2017. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of menacing in the second degree, and imposed sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), seeking leave to withdraw as counsel.
ORDERED that the appeal is held in abeyance, the application by assigned counsel for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted, and new counsel is assigned;
Appellate Advocates
111 John Street, 9th Floor
New York, NY 10038.
New counsel is directed to serve and file a brief within 90 days after the date of this decision and order. The People may serve and file a respondent's brief within 21 days after the service upon them of the appellant's brief. Appellant's new counsel, if so advised, may serve and file a reply brief within seven days after the service of the respondent's brief. Relieved counsel is [*2]directed to turn over all papers in his possession to the newly assigned counsel.
Assigned counsel submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), setting forth her conclusion that there exist no nonfrivolous issues that could be raised on appeal. However, the brief is deficient because it fails to adequately analyze potential appellate issues or highlight facts in the record that might arguably support the appeal (see People v Murray, 169 AD3d 227 [2019]; People v Dimon, 164 AD3d 600 [2018]; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 256 [2011]). Since the brief does not demonstrate that assigned counsel fulfilled her obligations under Anders, we must assign new counsel to represent appellant (see Dimon, 164 AD3dat 601; People v Rivera, 142 AD3d 512, 513 [2016]; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d at 258; People v Nieves, 64 Misc 3d 134[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 51097[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2019]).
Accordingly, the appeal is held in abeyance, assigned counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted, and new counsel is assigned to prosecute the appeal.
WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and SIEGAL, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: February 21, 2020
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.