What's happening
Writing a plain-English summary… Track this bill to get it by email.
Why it matters
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Sponsors
History
- Referred to codes
- Referred to codes
Full text
The text isn't available here yet. Check nysenate.gov.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the penal law, in relation to the unlawful disclosure of personal information concerning a police officer
Summary of provisions
This proposal would amend Section 240.30 of the Penal Law, Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree, by adding a new subdivision five thereto. This new subdivision would make it a class A misdemeanor to disclose or disseminate, with intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm, the residence address, private telephone number or any other information identifying a police officer if the person disclosing the information has no legitimate purpose and knows, or reasonably should know, that his or her conduct is likely to cause reasonable fear of material harm to the physical health, safety of propel1y of such officer. a member of such officer's family, or a third party with whom such officer is acquainted.
Justification
A police officer's job is a dangerous and stressful one. In the course of their jobs, officers routinely issue summonses and arrest offenders, as well as stop, warn or otherwise prevent individuals from committing criminal acts or quality-of-life offenses. Every such encounter is potentially dangerous. Police officers know that while they are on the job they may be the target of those who have contempt for authority or a personal dislike of police. Police officers accept this every day they report for duty, hut it goes far beyond the reasonable demands of the job for officers and their families to be placed in fear of someone disclosing their home addresses, phone numbers or other identifying information in order to harass, annoy, alarm or threaten them, either by direct disclosure or by passing such information on to others. Further, in this new age of technology, the threat becomes ever more dangerous, when simply posting such information on a website can instantly disseminate it widely.
Read the full memo (631 words)
The harassment of police officers, including police officers identified as undercover officers, by the disclosure of personal information about them and their families, is not a theoretical problem. It actually occurs, and the victims have very limited recourse because of a gap in the law. It is urgent to address this problem as soon as possible.
State law currently recognizes the need to protect the confidentiality of a police officer's personal information in certain circumstances. Civil Rights Law § 50-a permits the disclosure of personnel records only upon the consent of the officer or upon a lawful court order. Public Officers Law § 89(7) exempts government disclosure of the home address of a public employee pun:uant to the State Freedom of Information Law.
In the context of discovery in criminal proceedings, Criminal Procedure Law § 240.50(4) provides that "the personal residence address of a police officer...shall not be required to be disclosed except pursuant to an order issued by a court following a finding of good cause." All of these laws are designed to protect the privacy of police officers' personal information.
Yet apart from these circumstances, the law does not address the situation where a person discloses personal identifying information about a police officer for no legitimate purpose. but instead to harass, threaten or alarm the officer. his or her family, or even other police officers.
New York courts have made clear that the use of the language "no legitimate purpose" is appropriate for the prohibition of harassment-based crimes, such as stalking, in circumstances where there is an "absence of reason or justification to engage someone, other than to hound, frighten, intimidate or threaten." See People v. Stuart, 100 N.Y.2d 412 (2003). Such language is similarly appropriate for the comparatively serious problem of police officer harassment addressed by this bill.
Prior legislative history
New bill.
Fiscal implications
None.
Effective date
90 days after it becomes law.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.