Opinion
162
Decided September 18, 2003.
Appeal, by permission of an Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, entered May 13, 2002, which denied an application for a writ of error coram nobis on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel to vacate an order of that Court, entered April 20, 1998 ( 249 A.D.2d 490), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court (Arthur J. Cooperman, J.), rendered in Queens County upon a verdict convicting defendant of burglary in the first degree (10 counts), robbery in the first degree (four counts), attempted robbery in the first degree (six counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts), and attempted robbery in the second degree (three counts).
Submitted by Georgia J. Hinde, for appellant.
Submitted by James A. Dolan, for respondent.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo and Read concur.
The appeal should be dismissed. The amendment to CPL 450.90(1) took effect on November 1, 2002 (L 2002, ch 498). It provided authority to grant leave to appeal from an order granting or denying a motion to set aside an order of an intermediate appellate court on the ground of ineffective assistance or wrongful deprivation of appellate counsel. The amendment should be accorded prospective application, and as such it authorizes motions for permission to appeal from only those Appellate Division orders made on or after the statute's effective date. Here, the Appellate Division order was made before the effective date of the statute. Accordingly, the defendant may not avail himself of the statute.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, appeal dismissed, in a memorandum.