| People v Pierre, Tedy |
| Motion No: 2007-00899 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2009 NYSlipOp 68260(U) |
| Decided on April 1, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M84669
E/sl
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
JOSEPH COVELLO
THOMAS A. DICKERSON
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, JJ.
|
2007-00899 The People, etc., respondent, v Tedy Pierre, appellant. (Ind. No. 3991/06)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered January 18, 2007, as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel. By order to show cause dated February 18, 2009, the appellant was directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be entered dismissing the appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal is untimely (see CPL 460.10[1][a], 460.30), and the time in which to seek leave to file a late notice of appeal has expired, and the motion, in effect, was held in abeyance in the interim.
Upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the appellant's motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied as the notice of appeal was timely filed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant's affidavit setting forth (1) the appellant's full financial situation including all assets, both real and personal, as well as any and all sources of income before conviction, (2) whether the appellant was represented by retained counsel or assigned counsel at trial, and if retained counsel, the amount and source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel, (3) Whether the appellant retained counsel to prosecute the appeal, and (4) if on bail before conviction, the amount and source of the bail money, and if bail was the appellant's own money, what happened to the same after conviction.
RIVERA, J.P., COVELLO, DICKERSON and LEVENTHAL, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court