What's happening
This bill expands the definition of aggravated cruelty to animals by removing the requirement that the injury be "serious."
Why it matters
Broadens the scope of animal protection. by allowing prosecution for aggravated cruelty even if the physical injury to an animal is not "serious," potentially increasing accountability for a wider range of abusive actions.
Strengthens deterrence against animal cruelty. by signaling that any intentional, aggravated infliction of pain—regardless of the injury’s severity—can result in criminal charges, which may discourage acts of cruelty that previously went unpunished.
Reflects evolving societal attitudes toward animal welfare. by prioritizing the manner and intent of harm (such as sadistic or depraved acts) over the outcome, highlighting a shift toward recognizing the intrinsic value of animals and the seriousness of their mistreatment.
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
Prosecutors and law enforcement
The bill would remove the requirement that physical injury be serious in aggravated-cruelty cases involving companion animals, while retaining the intent, lack of justifiable purpose and aggravated-cruelty requirements.
Companion animal owners and animal welfare advocates
The bill would extend aggravated-cruelty protections to intentional injuries that are not serious when the conduct meets the law’s aggravated-cruelty definition.
Criminal defense attorneys and defendants
The bill would broaden potential aggravated-cruelty liability by eliminating serious physical injury as a required element of injury-based charges.
Headline styles
Strengthen Animal Cruelty Penalties
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
History
- Referred to agriculture
- Referred to agriculture
Companion bill
The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.
Toughen Animal Cruelty Law
In Assembly Committee · Agriculture · Sponsor Linda Rosenthal
Full text
1 pageUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
4163
2017-2018 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
February 6, 2017
Introduced by Sens. KRUEGER, ADDABBO, AVELLA, FUNKE, GOLDEN, HAMILTON, HOYLMAN, MURPHY, PERALTA, PERKINS, SERINO, SERRANO, STAVISKY -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Agriculture
AN ACT to amend the agriculture and markets law, in relation to aggravated cruelty to animals
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Subdivision 1 of section 353-a of the agriculture and markets law, as added by chapter 118 of the laws of 1999, is amended to read as follows:
1. A person is guilty of aggravated cruelty to animals when, with no justifiable purpose, he or she intentionally kills or intentionally causes [serious] physical injury to a companion animal with aggravated cruelty. For purposes of this section, "aggravated cruelty" shall mean conduct which: (i) is intended to cause extreme physical pain; or (ii) is done or carried out in an especially depraved or sadistic manner.
§ 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD05265-01-7
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the agriculture and markets law, in relation to aggravated cruelty to animals
Purpose
Removes the term "serious" from the "serious physical injury" language of Section 353-a of the agriculture and markets law.
Summary of provisions
Subdivision one of Section 353-a of the agriculture and markets law would be amended, with the term "serious" in line 3 of subdivision one struck, to read only as "...intentionally causes (serious) physical injury to a companion animal...".
Justification
In June 2014 on Staten Island, Rocky, an English bulldog, was the victim of a terrible act of cruelty when a neighbor threw ammonia in his face in an attempt to quiet his barking. By the time they brought Rocky to the vet, he had ulcers in both his eyes and the vet wasn't sure if he would ever see again. Thankfully, Rocky was able to make a full recovery. Yet this recovery also gave the perpetrator a way out. Due to the language of the felony animal cruelty statute, a charge could not be sustained. The dog's recovery conflicted with the prosecutor's interpretation of "serious physical injury". This meant that because the dog survived and recovered 100's, the perpetrator would be facing a lesser penalty. This is nothing new. The Times Union reports that only 17% of those charged with felony aggravated cruelty to animals end up in felony convictions (in New York State). In this case, the perpetrator was given conditional discharge after being convicted of misdemeanor animal cruelty charges, and forced to pay $1,000 to the ASPCA for the dog's medical treatment. Also, the perpetrator may not go near Rocky, and may never be allowed to own a dog again. It is evident the punishment does not fit the crime. Eliminating the word "serious" from the statute would fix this, so if a person's actions were intended to cause extreme physical pain or conducted in an especially depraved or sadistic manner (language from section 353-a of the Agriculture and Markets law), one would only have to prove that the animal was killed or injured.
Legislative history
2015-2016: S.4265/A.6252
Fiscal implications
None
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.