People v. Anderson
Opinion
<div>People v Anderson - 2026 NY Slip Op 02464
<div> skip to main content </div>
<div> <p>It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.</p> </div>
<div> <header> <div> <img src="/reporter/images/nys-logo-white.svg" alt=""> </div> <div> <span title="Law Reporting Bureau Home Page">Law Reporting <br>Bureau <span></span></span> <span>Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter</span> <nav> Court Decisions Resources About </nav> </div> <div> <img src="/reporter/images/lrb-seal.png" alt=""> </div> </header> </div>
<nav> <ol> <li>Home</li> <li>All Court Decisions</li> <li>Decisions</li> </ol> </nav> <div> <div> <h1>People v Anderson</h1> <p>2026 NY Slip Op 02464</p> <p>April 23, 2026</p> <p>Appellate Division, First Department</p> <p>Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.</p> <p>This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.</p> </div> <div> <p>The People of the State of New York, Respondent,</p> <p>v</p> <p>Durell Anderson, Defendant-Appellant.</p> </div> <p>Decided and Entered: April 23, 2026</p> <p>Ind No. 1397/21, 71988/22|Appeal No. 6450|Case No. 2023-04194|</p> <p>Before: Scarpulla, J.P., Friedman, Gesmer, Shulman, Chan, JJ. </p> <div> <p>Jenay Nurse Guilford, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Benjamin Rutkin-Becker of counsel), for appellant.</p> <p>Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Andrew H. Chung of counsel), for respondent.</p> </div> <span>[*1]</span> <p>An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Brendan T. Lantry, J.), rendered June 29, 2023,</p> <p>Said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive,</p> <p>It is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.</p> <p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.</p> <p>ENTERED: April 23, 2026</p> <p>Counsel for appellant is referred to § 606.5, Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department.</p> </div>
<div> <footer> <div> <p>Court Decisions</p> All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search </div> <div> <p>Resources</p> RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index </div> <div> <p>About</p> About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter </div> <div> <p>Quick Contact Info</p> <p>17 Lodge Street</p> <p>Albany, NY 12207</p> <p>Phone: (518) 453-6900</p> </div> </footer> </div> <div> <p>Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.</p> </div>
</div>
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

People v Anderson
2026 NY Slip Op 02464
April 23, 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
Durell Anderson, Defendant-Appellant.
Decided and Entered: April 23, 2026
Ind No. 1397/21, 71988/22|Appeal No. 6450|Case No. 2023-04194|
Before: Scarpulla, J.P., Friedman, Gesmer, Shulman, Chan, JJ.
Jenay Nurse Guilford, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Benjamin Rutkin-Becker of counsel), for appellant.
Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Andrew H. Chung of counsel), for respondent.
An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Brendan T. Lantry, J.), rendered June 29, 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: April 23, 2026
Counsel for appellant is referred to § 606.5, Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department.
Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.