A New York appellate court has affirmed the convictions of Jason Perez for burglary in the third degree and grand larceny in the third degree. The ruling, issued on June 2, 2026, by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, confirms that the evidence against Perez was sufficient to support the jury's verdict. This decision impacts Perez, who is currently serving a prison sentence, and reinforces the legal standards for proving such crimes.
The case, identified as Ind No. 3961/15 and Appeal No. 6765, stems from a 2017 jury trial where Perez was found guilty of breaking into a restricted area and stealing items valued at over $30,000. The court's ruling emphasizes the importance of surveillance evidence in criminal cases, particularly in establishing intent and unlawful entry.
Background
The parties involved in this case are the People of the State of New York, represented by District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., and Jason Perez, the defendant-appellant, represented by Twyla Carter from The Legal Aid Society. The dispute centers around Perez's actions during an investigation into missing items from private offices.
During the investigation, surveillance footage captured Perez and a co-defendant entering a locked private closet from which they were specifically denied access. The footage showed them entering with empty bags and exiting with those bags full of stolen merchandise. This evidence led to their arrest and subsequent charges of burglary and grand larceny.
The Ruling
The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the lower court's judgment, which had convicted Perez and sentenced him to concurrent prison terms of 2 to 4 years. The court ruled that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, stating, "Defendant's intentional presence in the restricted area and visible indication that he was removing items from the closet... provided compelling proof that defendant entered the private closet knowingly, unlawfully, and with larcenous intent."
The judges involved in this ruling included Moulton, J.P., Kapnick, González, Shulman, and Chan. They referenced previous cases to support their decision, indicating that the jury had sufficient grounds to find Perez guilty based on the evidence presented.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for the legal landscape surrounding burglary and grand larceny cases in New York. It highlights the importance of video evidence in establishing a defendant's intent and actions during the commission of a crime. The court's affirmation of the jury's verdict reinforces the standards for proving guilt in similar cases, potentially influencing future prosecutions.
The decision also serves as a reminder of the consequences of unlawful entry and theft, particularly in cases involving significant monetary value. It may deter similar criminal behavior by emphasizing the legal repercussions that can follow such actions.
What's Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Perez plans to appeal the decision further. However, as it stands, the ruling from the Appellate Division is final unless a higher court chooses to review the case.