Judicial Insight
Back to feed
(the sentence is upheld)CriminalCourt of AppealsAppeal

People v. Grundy

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided
Oct 1, 2026
Docket
Ind No. 72680/22|Appeal No. 7120|Case No. 2024-00864|
Judges
Not listed
Cited as2026 NY Slip Op 05605
Detailed analysis & 3-line summary

AI breakdown

Analyzed Oct 2, 2026

Where this case stands

  1. : sentenced the defendant, found not excessive.

  2. This decision · Appeal

    (the sentence is upheld)

TL;DR

  1. 1The defendant appealed his sentence, claiming it was too harsh.
  2. 2The court reviewed the case and found the sentence fair and not excessive.
  3. 3The decision means the original sentence remains in place.

Key issues

  1. 1

    Was the sentence excessive?

    Holding · The court the sentence, determining it was not excessive given the circumstances.

Why it matters

This affects defendants seeking to appeal sentences they feel are too harsh, clarifying standards for what is considered excessive.

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

If you were the judge?

Did the New York court hand down a fair sentence?

  1. 1A defendant in New York challenged his sentence as too harsh.
  2. 2His appeal questioned whether the punishment fit the crime.
  3. 3The court had to decide if the sentence was excessive.

Do you think the New York court handed down a fair sentence?

Be the first juror

Parties

  • Prosecution

    People

  • Appellee

    Grundy

Roles are inferred from the case caption.

Opinion of the court
People v Grundy 2026 NY Slip Op 05605 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 David Grundy, Defendant-Appellant. Decided and Entered: October 01, 2026 Ind No. 72680/22|Appeal No. 7120|Case No. 2024-00864| Before: Moulton, J.P., Kennedy, Friedman, Michael, Hagler, JJ. Twyla Carter, The Legal Aid Society, New York (William B. Carney of counsel), for appellant. Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Ethan Solomon 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 (Curtis J. Farber, J.), rendered January 29, 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