N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Penal / PART Specific Offenses / TITLE Anticipatory Offenses / ARTICLE Conspiracy
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Penal Law § 105.20 (2026)

Conspiracy; pleading and proof; necessity of overt act

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 105.20 Conspiracy; pleading and proof; necessity of overt act.
  A person shall not be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is
alleged and proved to have been committed by one of the conspirators in
furtherance of the conspiracy.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 63 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: People v. Gagnier, 146 A.D.3d 1019 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Gagnier, 146 A.D.3d 1019 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “A person may be convicted of conspiracy so long as an overt act is alleged and shown to have been committed by one of the conspirators in furtherance of a conspiracy (see Penal Law § 105.20; People v Cochran, 140 AD3d 1198, 1199 [2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 970 [2016]).”
People v. Wright, 139 A.D.3d 1094 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). · cites it 2× ““A person shall not be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is alleged and proved to have been committed by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy” (Penal Law § 105.20; see generally People v Monday, 309 AD2d 977, 978 [2003]).”
People v. Chambers, 2020 NY Slip Op 3822 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). · cites it 2× “To support a conviction for conspiracy in the second degree, the People had to prove that defendant, acting with intent that conduct constituting a class A felony be performed, agreed with one or more persons to engage in or cause the performance of such conduct and that one of…”
People v. Monday, 309 A.D.2d 977 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003). · cites it 2× “The trial evidence established that in August 2001, an alleged cocaine dealer named “Dan” or “Dante” began making trips from the City of Binghamton, Broome County to stay in defendant’s trailer. Between August and October 2001, the Wrights purchased cocaine approximately 15…”
People v. Ribowsky, 568 N.E.2d 1197 (NY 1991). “40 [1] [b]; Penal Law §§ 105.20,105.25 [l]). 1 Generally, it is for the jury to decide as a matter of fact, the place where the crime was committed (People v Hetenyi, supra) or any other fact relevant to venue (People v Tullo, supra).”
United States v. Victor J. Orena, Also Known as Little Vic, 32 F.3d 704 (2d Cir. 1994). “” Although these counts were charged as direct violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1959 (a)(5), which does not contain an overt act requirement, Orena contends that the indictment was fatally defective with respect to these counts because N.”
People v. Ramos, 971 N.E.2d 369 (NY 2012). “Penal Law § 105.20 *420 says: “A person shall not be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is alleged and proved to have been committed by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
People v. Hilliard, 49 A.D.3d 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). “Defendant’s conduct in obtaining a gun and giving it to Wells and in driving with the victim to the scene constituted overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy (see People v Faccio, 33 AD3d 1041, 1043 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 845 [2007]; see also Penal Law § 105.20). Contrary…”
People v. Placido, 149 A.D.3d 1157 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “As the People conceded, both at trial and now, count 2 of the indictment was defective inasmuch as it failed to allege the commission of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy as required by Penal Law § 105.20 (see CPL 200.50 [7] [a]; 200.”
People v. Falkenstein, 288 A.D.2d 922 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001). “A conviction of conspiracy in the second degree requires the commission of an overt act (see, Penal Law § 105.20), and here the People properly alleged three overt acts committed by defendant in a single count charging one offense (see, CPL 200.”
People v. Cochran, 140 A.D.3d 1198 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). “Notably, “[a] person shall not be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is alleged and proved to have been committed by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy” (Penal Law § 105.20; see generally People v Monday, 309 AD2d 977, 978 [2003]).”
People v. Jewsbury, 115 A.D.2d 341 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985). · cites it 2× “Penal Law § 105.20 provides that: "A person shall not be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is alleged and proved to have been committed by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
Show all 63 citing cases →
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.