PEOPLE v. SOKOLSKI (2020)

ORDERED that the judgments of conviction are affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v. California (386 US 738 [1967]) regarding docket Nos. 2014RI010430, 2015RI000968, 2015RI003584, and 2015RI006475, and, upon an independent review of the record with respect thereto, 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 insofar as the appeal is from those judgments of conviction (see id.; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmine A.], 89 AD3d 252 [2011]; People v. Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v. Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]).

Defendant's challenge to the final orders of protection issued under docket Nos. 2015RI001842 and 2015RI004778 is unpreserved for appellate review because defendant did not raise this issue at sentencing (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v. Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 316-318 [2004]; People v. Manalang, 54 Misc 3d 138[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50146[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2017] ). In any event, by their terms, the orders of protection have expired (see People v. Francois, 64 Misc 3d 139[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 51241[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2019] ), rendering the issue academic.

Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., WESTON and TOUSSAINT, JJ., concur.