People v. Rodriguez
Docket Ind No. 01205/19|Appeal No. 6488|Case No. 2022-03040|
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 02732
- Docket numbers
- Ind No01205/19Appeal No6488Case No2022-03040
Appeal from a judgment of conviction and sentence entered June 22, 2022, in Supreme Court, Bronx County.
Summary
The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the conviction and sentence of Stephanie Rodriguez. Rodriguez appealed a June 22, 2022 judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County. After oral argument and consideration, the appellate court found the sentence was not excessive and therefore upheld the trial court's judgment. The opinion is a brief affirmance without extended written opinion and refers defense counsel to the court's procedural rule § 606.5.
Issue Decided
- Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive.
Court's Reasoning
The appellate court reviewed the sentence and concluded it was not excessive. The decision does not set out extended factual or legal analysis; the court expressly stated that after due deliberation the sentence was appropriate and therefore affirmed the judgment. The brief order indicates the court found no basis to disturb the trial court's sentencing discretion.
Parties
- Respondent
- The People of the State of New York
- Appellant
- Stephanie Rodriguez
- Judge
- James A. McCarty, Jr.
- Judge
- Kennedy, J.P.
- Judge
- Gesmer, J.
- Judge
- González, J.
- Judge
- Rosado, J.
- Judge
- Chan, J.
Key Dates
- Trial court judgment date
- 2022-06-22
- Appellate decision date
- 2026-04-30
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult appellate counsel about further review
If the defendant wishes to continue challenging the conviction or sentence, consult counsel promptly about seeking leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals and about applicable deadlines.
- 2
Consider post-conviction remedies
Discuss with counsel whether post-conviction motions, resentencing requests, or habeas review are appropriate given the case specifics.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment and found that the sentence imposed was not excessive.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The decision affects the defendant, Stephanie Rodriguez, by leaving her conviction and sentence in place.
- Does this opinion explain why the sentence was appropriate?
- No detailed explanation was provided; the court issued a short order stating it had considered the matter and found the sentence not excessive.
- Can this be appealed further?
- Possibly — the defendant may seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, subject to the rules and deadlines for such filings.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
People v Rodriguez - 2026 NY Slip Op 02732 People v Rodriguez 2026 NY Slip Op 02732 April 30, 2026 Appellate Division, First Department The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Stephanie Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant. Decided and Entered: April 30, 2026 Ind No. 01205/19|Appeal No. 6488|Case No. 2022-03040| Before: Kennedy, J.P., Gesmer, González, Rosado, Chan, JJ. Twyla Carter, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Xhesi Hysi of counsel), for appellant. Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Oliver Lee 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 (James A. McCarty, Jr., J.), rendered June 22, 2022, 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 30, 2026 Counsel for appellant is referred to § 606.5, Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department.