PEOPLE v. BARKSDALE (2023)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gary Miret, J.), rendered March 24, 2022, convicting him of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, 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 judgment is affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to (Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal.  The Supreme Court erred in sentencing the defendant prior to the preparation of a presentence investigation report (see CPL 390.20[1]), however, since the defendant has completed his sentence and the remedy would be vacatur of the sentence and remittal for re-sentencing, this issue is academic (see People v. Baldwin, 39 N.Y.3d 1097, 186 N.Y.S.3d 112, 206 N.E.3d 1255;  People v. Shearer, 213 A.D.3d 699, 700–701, 182 N.Y.S.3d 727).  Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493;  Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 A.D.3d 252, 931 N.Y.S.2d 676;  People v. Paige, 54 A.D.2d 631, 387 N.Y.S.2d 399;  cf.  People v. Gonzalez, 47 N.Y.2d 606, 419 N.Y.S.2d 913, 393 N.E.2d 987).

BARROS, J.P., WOOTEN, FORD and WARHIT, JJ., concur.