People v. Cornelius

2026 NY Slip Op 00432
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 29, 2026
DocketInd No. 3898/16; Appeal No. 5712; Case No. 2018-04168
StatusPublished

This text of 2026 NY Slip Op 00432 (People v. Cornelius) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Cornelius, 2026 NY Slip Op 00432 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

People v Cornelius (2026 NY Slip Op 00432)
People v Cornelius
2026 NY Slip Op 00432
Decided on January 29, 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 29, 2026
Before: Scarpulla, J.P., Kapnick, González, Shulman, O'Neill Levy, JJ.

Ind No. 3898/16|Appeal No. 5712|Case No. 2018-04168|

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Jarell Cornelius, Defendant-Appellant.


Caprice R. Jenerson, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Rosemary Herbert of counsel), for appellant.

Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Andrew Kim of counsel), for respondent.



Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert M. Stolz, J.), rendered April 11, 2018, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict convicting defendant of grand larceny in the fourth degree was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]; see also People v Baque, 43 NY3d 26 [2024]). The store owner's testimony regarding both the wholesale and retail value of the stolen cell phones and the cost of replacing the stolen display-only phones supported the jury's conclusion that the combined values of the stolen property exceeded the statutory threshold of $1,000 (see Penal Law § 155.30[1]; People v Irrizari, 5 NY2d 142, 146 [1959]; People v Coulibaly, 223 AD3d 536, 537 [1st Dept 2024], lv denied 41 NY3d 982 [2024]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: January 29, 2026



Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Irrizari
156 N.E.2d 69 (New York Court of Appeals, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2026 NY Slip Op 00432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cornelius-nyappdiv-2026.