New York Consolidated Laws
N.Y. Criminal Procedure Law § 60.20 (2026)
Rules of evidence; testimonial capacity; evidence given by children
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NY-LEGnysenate.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 60.20 Rules of evidence; testimonial capacity; evidence given by
children.
1. Any person may be a witness in a criminal proceeding unless the
court finds that, by reason of infancy or mental disease or defect, he
does not possess sufficient intelligence or capacity to justify the
reception of his evidence.
2. Every witness more than nine years old may testify only under oath
unless the court is satisfied that such witness cannot, as a result of
mental disease or defect, understand the nature of an oath. A witness
less than nine years old may not testify under oath unless the court is
satisfied that he or she understands the nature of an oath. If under
either of the above provisions, a witness is deemed to be ineligible to
testify under oath, the witness may nevertheless be permitted to give
unsworn evidence if the court is satisfied that the witness possesses
sufficient intelligence and capacity to justify the reception thereof. A
witness understands the nature of an oath if he or she appreciates the
difference between truth and falsehood, the necessity for telling the
truth, and the fact that a witness who testifies falsely may be
punished.
3. A defendant may not be convicted of an offense solely upon unsworn
evidence given pursuant to subdivision two.Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2002–2012 · leading case: People v. Bedessie, 970 N.E.2d 380 (NY 2012).
People v. Bedessie, 970 N.E.2d 380 (NY 2012). “Undoubtedly, relevant testimony of an expert on the reliability of confessions according to scientifically accepted principles, as well as Criminal Procedure Law §§ 60.20 and 60.50, seeks to prevent a taint of the criminal justice system—wrongful convictions.”
Matter of Noel O., 2007 NY Slip Op 51155(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Queens Cty. 2007). “1 [2]; Criminal Procedure Law §60.20 [2]). "The tests as to the infant's testimonial capacity and ability to understand the nature of an oath are necessarily individualistic in nature" ( People v.”
People v. Brown, 191 Misc. 2d 97 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2002). “The defense argues that such an examination is an essential component of their anticipated challenge to the witness’s testimonial capacity at trial under Criminal Procedure Law § 60.20. The District Attorney opposes the application, arguing that the testimonial capacity of a…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.