Judicial Insight
Back to feed
(the conviction stands)CriminalCourt of AppealsAppeal

People v. Coleman

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided
Oct 1, 2026
Docket
Ind No. 72429/23|Appeal No. 7102|Case No. 2024-07787|
Judges
Not listed
Cited as2026 NY Slip Op 05606
Detailed analysis & 3-line summary

AI breakdown

Analyzed Oct 2, 2026

Where this case stands

  1. 1st instance (New York County Supreme Court): sentenced the defendant.

  2. This decision · Appeal

    (the conviction stands)

TL;DR

  1. 1The case is about whether the defendant's sentence was too long.
  2. 2The court decided to keep the sentence as it was, finding it fair.
  3. 3The main reason was that the sentence was not considered excessive.

Key issues

  1. 1

    Was the sentence excessive?

    Holding · The court held that the sentence was not excessive and it as fair.

Why it matters

This decision affects how sentences are reviewed in future cases, ensuring appropriate punishment.

The AI breakdown is a reading aid, not legal advice. Always check the opinion for the exact wording.

If you were the judge?

Was the defendant's sentence too harsh?

  1. 1The defendant appealed the sentence given by the lower court.
  2. 2He claims the punishment was more than what the crime deserved.
  3. 3The court needs to decide if the sentence was unfairly long.

Was the sentence in the defendant's case excessive?

Be the first juror

Parties

  • Prosecution

    People

  • Appellee

    Coleman

Roles are inferred from the case caption.

Opinion of the court
People v Coleman 2026 NY Slip Op 05606 October 1, 2026 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ethaniel Coleman, Defendant-Appellant. Decided and Entered: October 01, 2026 Ind No. 72429/23|Appeal No. 7102|Case No. 2024-07787| Before: Moulton, J.P., Kennedy, Friedman, Michael, Hagler, JJ. Jenay Nurse Guilford, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Alec Miran of counsel), for appellant. Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jamie Masten of counsel), for respondent. [*1] An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), rendered December 03, 2024, Said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, It is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT. ENTERED: October 1, 2026 Counsel for appellant is referred to § 606.5, Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department.
View on CourtListener