Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jamaal MORTON, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Drago, J.), rendered September 9, 2005, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
Following a four-day trial at which 10 witnesses testified, defendant was convicted of the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree. At sentencing, defendant executed a waiver of his right to appeal and was sentenced as a second felony offender to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 4 1/212 to 9 years. Defense counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment as counsel for defendant on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal (see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 [1967] ).
Upon our review of the record, we perceive at least one issue of arguable merit regarding the validity of defendant's waiver of appeal (see People v. Lewis, 29 A.D.3d 1076, 1076-1077, 813 N.Y.S.2d 686 [2006]; People v. Santalucia, 9 A.D.3d 740, 740-741, 779 N.Y.S.2d 793 [2004]; see also People v. Smith, 32 A.D.3d 553, 555-556, 820 N.Y.S.2d 162 [2006] ), and a determination of the enforceability of defendant's waiver may bring up for review any meritorious issues regarding, among other things, the pretrial procedures and hearings and the four-day trial which resulted in defendant's conviction (see People v. Santalucia, 9 A.D.3d at 740, 779 N.Y.S.2d 793; see also Matter of Taylor v. Fry, 42 A.D.3d 680, 681, 838 N.Y.S.2d 449 [2007] ). Accordingly, the application of defendant's current counsel to be relieved of his assignment is granted and new counsel will be assigned to address any issues that the record may disclose (see People v. Cruwys, 113 A.D.2d 979, 493 N.Y.S.2d 653 [1985], lv. denied 67 N.Y.2d 650, 499 N.Y.S.2d 1046, 490 N.E.2d 562 [1986] ).
ORDERED that the decision is withheld, application to be relieved of assignment granted and new counsel to be assigned.
CARPINELLO, J.
CREW III, J.P., PETERS, SPAIN and MUGGLIN, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 29, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)