Opinion
2015-01-28
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Arthur FRAZIER, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Barry Stendig of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Jennifer Hagan of counsel; Kristen Lasak and Steven H. Ju on the brief), for respondent.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Barry Stendig of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Jennifer Hagan of counsel; Kristen Lasak and Steven H. Ju on the brief), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Camacho, J.), rendered October 26, 2011, convicting him of burglary in the second degree (eight counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, in which she moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.
ORDERED that the motion of Lynn W.L. Fahey for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant is granted, and she is directed to turn over all papers in her possession to new counsel assigned herein; and it is further,
ORDERED that Seymour W. James, Jr., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, N.Y. 10038 is assigned as counsel to perfect the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent is directed to furnish a copy of the certified transcript of the proceedings to the new assigned counsel; and it is further,
ORDERED that new counsel shall serve and file a brief on behalf of the appellant within 90 days of the date of this decision and order on motion, and the respondent shall serve and file its brief within 30 days after the brief on behalf of the appellant is served and filed. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated May 25, 2012, the appellant was granted leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, with the appeal to be heard on the original papers, including a certified transcript of the proceedings, and on the briefs of the parties, who were directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other.
Upon this Court's independent review of the record, we conclude that there are nonfrivolous issues in this case, including, but not necessarily limited to, whether the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's pretrial suppression motion. Accordingly,assignment of new counsel is warranted ( see People v. Hardman, 110 A.D.3d 917, 972 N.Y.S.2d 687; People v. Salgado, 103 A.D.3d 819, 959 N.Y.S.2d 287; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 A.D.3d 252, 931 N.Y.S.2d 676). SKELOS, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HINDS–RADIX, DUFFY and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.