Alvin M. Yearwood

The question: Whether the judgment in the case, entered after a plea taken before him, should stand on the defendant's appeal.

Outcome / stage: The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the judgment on Aug. 13, 2026.

The decision names him as the judge who presided at the plea.

Subsequent history: This entry is the appellate decision itself; any further appeal was not checked.

The question: Whether the conviction he entered on June 9, 2015 should stand on appeal.

Outcome / stage: The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the judgment on June 2, 2026.

The judgment under review dates from June 9, 2015.

Subsequent history: This entry is the appellate decision; whether the case went further was not checked.

The question: Whether the judgment he rendered on July 11, 2024 should stand on appeal.

Outcome / stage: The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment on May 14, 2026.

The judgment under review dates from July 11, 2024.

Subsequent history: The appellate decision is the latest step found; later review was not checked.

The question: Whether the judgment he rendered on Sept. 4, 2024 should stand on appeal, in whole or in part.

Outcome / stage: The Appellate Division unanimously modified the judgment on May 7, 2026, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, only to the extent of vacating the surcharge.

The change was limited to the surcharge.

Subsequent history: Further appeal after this decision was not checked.

The question: An appeal in a case where he took the defendant's plea; what the appeal asked is not stated in the sources found.

Outcome / stage: The Appellate Division issued its decision on Mar. 3, 2026; its outcome is not stated in the sources found.

The ruling under review is not described in the sources found.

History coverage: The outcome of this appeal and any later review were not established.

The question: What the case asked is not described in the sources found.

Outcome / stage: The outcome is not described in the sources found.

Issued while he sat on the New York City Criminal Court.

History coverage: Whether this opinion was appealed was not checked.