People v. Peterkin
Opinion
People v Peterkin (2026 NY Slip Op 00021)
| People v Peterkin |
| 2026 NY Slip Op 00021 |
| Decided on January 06, 2026 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered: January 06, 2026
Before: Webber, J.P., Friedman, Mendez, Shulman, Hagler, JJ.
Ind. No. 00758/21|Appeal No. 5502|Case No. 2023-05567|
v
Calvin Peterkin, Appellant.
Jenay Nurse Guilford, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Luz Beato of counsel), for appellant.
Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Andrew J. Loizides of counsel), for respondent.
An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Villegas, J.), rendered October 06, 2023,
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: January 6, 2026
Counsel for appellant is referred to § 606.5, Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department.
Opinion
| People v Peterkin |
| 2026 NY Slip Op 00021 |
| Decided on January 06, 2026 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered: January 06, 2026
Before: Webber, J.P., Friedman, Mendez, Shulman, Hagler, JJ.
Ind. No. 00758/21|Appeal No. 5502|Case No. 2023-05567|
v
Calvin Peterkin, Appellant.
Jenay Nurse Guilford, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Luz Beato of counsel), for appellant.
Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Andrew J. Loizides of counsel), for respondent.
An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Villegas, J.), rendered October 06, 2023,
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: January 6, 2026
Counsel for appellant is referred to § 606.5, Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.