From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gugliara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 22, 1988
137 A.D.2d 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

February 22, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.).


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant's assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 U.S. 738; People v Paige, 54 A.D.2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 N.Y.2d 606).

The claim raised in the defendant's pro se supplemental brief, that the presentence report was inadequate in that it contained little information concerning the defendant's background (see, CPL 390.20), is both unpreserved and meritless. No complaint concerning the adequacy of the report was raised before sentence was imposed. Moreover, any deficiency in the presentence report was due to the defendant's refusal to speak to the probation officer who prepared the report. The defendant should not be heard to complain of an omission that was of his own making. Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Gugliara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 22, 1988
137 A.D.2d 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Gugliara

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LAWRENCE GUGLIARA…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 22, 1988

Citations

137 A.D.2d 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Diaz

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.…