Legal Opinion
In re Max F.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 27, 2011PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1048The brief submitted by the appellant’s counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]) was deficient in that counsel failed to analyze any possible appellate issues or highlight anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal (id. at 744; see Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252 [2011]; People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633, 637 [2001]; People v Saunders, 52 AD2d 833 [1976]). To the contrary, the “argument” section of counsel’s brief merely states in conclusory fashion: “The undersigned has fully analyzed the record, performed the necessary legal research, spoke to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- People v. SaundersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- In re Giovanni S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. StokesNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- People v. BargerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dylan Mc. v. Michelle M.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Filippi v. FilippiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Filippi v. FilippiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013