People v. Sheard

2026 NY Slip Op 02343 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York First Department 2026) · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department · April 16, 2026 · No. Ind No. 70158/22; Appeal No. 6390; Case No. 2025-04560

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department reversed a Bronx County Supreme Court order that vacated guilty verdicts for attempted sex trafficking of a child and attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree. The court held that the evidence was legally sufficient and that the defendant's conduct came dangerously close to completing the intended offenses, reinstating the verdicts and remitting for resentencing.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department
Writing for the Court
Moulton, J.P.; Scarpulla, J.; Shulman, J.; Rodriguez, J.; Michael, J.
Jurisdiction
New York Appellate Division, First Department
Decision date
April 16, 2026
Docket number
Ind No. 70158/22; Appeal No. 6390; Case No. 2025-04560
Procedural posture
The People appealed from an order of Supreme Court, Bronx County, that granted reargument but adhered to its prior order vacating the guilty verdicts on attempted sex trafficking of a child and attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree.
Standard of review
For legal sufficiency, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also considered whether the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
Precedential value
published
Parties
The People of the State of New York v. David Sheard
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

criminal procedureevidencestandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate litigationevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support convictions for attempted sex trafficking of a child and attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree.
  2. Whether the evidence demonstrated that defendant came dangerously close to completing those attempted offenses.
  3. Whether the verdicts on those counts were against the weight of the evidence.

Holdings

  1. The evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury's verdicts on both attempted offenses, and Supreme Court improperly vacated those guilty verdicts.
  2. The evidence established that defendant came dangerously close to committing both attempted sex trafficking of a child and attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree.
  3. The jury's verdicts were not against the weight of the evidence.

Key quotations

Evidence is legally sufficient if, "after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt" ([*1])
To be guilty of an attempt to commit a crime, "a person's conduct" must come "dangerously close to committing the intended crime" ([*2])
carr[ied] the project forward within dangerous proximity to the criminal end to be attained ([*2])

Factual background

Defendant, age 34, operated a sex-worker business using A.J., age 16, as a sex worker. After an undercover police operation rescued A.J., defendant sent communications that included screenshots of sex buyers requesting "Candy" and repeatedly asked A.J. to return. The jury found that defendant's conduct was intended to reinitiate his exploitation of A.J. as a child sex worker.

Procedural history

A jury convicted defendant of several offenses, including attempted sex trafficking of a child and attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree. Supreme Court orally granted defendant's motion for a trial order of dismissal on those two counts. After granting the People's motion to reargue, Supreme Court adhered to its original dismissal order. The Appellate Division reversed, denied defendant's motion in its entirety, reinstated the verdicts, and remitted for resentencing.

Remand instructions

Reinstate the verdicts convicting defendant of attempted sex trafficking of a child and attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree, deny defendant's motion in its entirety, and remit the matter for resentencing.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…