Appeal from judgments of the City Court of Mount Vernon, Westchester County (Brenda Dowery-Rodriguez, J.), rendered June 30, 2005. The judgments convicted defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of criminal mischief in the fourth degree and resisting arrest.

Appeal held in abeyance, application by Gerald Zuckerman, Esq. to be relieved as counsel granted and new counsel assigned to prosecute the appeal. Gerald Zuckerman, Esq. is directed to turn over all papers in his possession to new counsel assigned herein, and new counsel shall serve and file a brief on behalf of defendant within 90 days of the decision and order entered hereon, and the People shall serve
and file their brief within 30 days after service upon them of a copy of the appellant's brief.

Assigned counsel submitted an Anders brief setting forth little more than his statement that he is "unaware" of the existence of "meritorious issues . . . that would require the reversal of [the] conviction" [sic] (cf. Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]). Such a brief does not reflect that counsel determined the appeal to be frivolous after "a conscientious review of the record" (People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633, 636 [2001]). At minimum, an Anders brief must "refer[] to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal" (Anders v California, 386 US at 744) via "a statement of the factual and legal issues relevant to the conviction and sentence sufficient to enable the court to evaluate and correctly decide the appeal" (People v [*2]Bing, 144 AD2d 249, 249 [1988], quoting People v Miller, 99 AD2d 1021 [1984]). As an appellate court's review of the record cannot "substitute for the single-minded advocacy of appellate counsel" (People v Casiano, 67 NY2d 906, 907 [1986]), a brief that fails to satisfy that standard deprives a defendant of the right to the effective assistance of appellate counsel (People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633, supra; People v Johnson, 11 Misc 3d 136[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 50494[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). We note that a review of the record reveals at least one nonfrivolous issue, the court's apparent failure to sentence defendant on his conviction of resisting arrest (see e.g. People v
Lomba, 183 AD2d 672 [1992]). Accordingly, appellate counsel's application to be relieved of his representation must be granted and new counsel assigned to prosecute the appeal.

Rudolph, P.J., Angiolillo and Lippman, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: September 25, 2006