New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Penal Law § 135.50 (2026)

Custodial interference in the first degree

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 135.50 Custodial interference in the first degree.
  A person is guilty of custodial interference in the first degree when
he commits the crime of custodial interference in the second degree:
  1. With intent to permanently remove the victim from this state, he
removes such person from the state; or
  2. Under circumstances which expose the victim to a risk that his
safety will be endangered or his health materially impaired.
  It shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution under subdivision
one of this section that the victim had been abandoned or that the
taking was necessary in an emergency to protect the victim because he
has been subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse.
  Custodial interference in the first degree is a class E felony.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2021 · leading case: People v. Morel, 164 A.D.2d 677 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

People v. Morel, 164 A.D.2d 677 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991). · cites it 2× “Insofar as relevant to the instant appeal, Penal Law § 135.50 defines custodial interference in the first degree as follows: "A person is guilty of custodial interference in the first degree when he commits the crime of custodial interference in the second degree: "1.”

Kabia v. Koch, 186 Misc. 2d 363 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 2000). “Such may be a class E felony (custodial interference, first *371 degree — Penal Law § 135.50) or a class A misdemeanor (custodial interference, second degree — Penal Law § 135.”

People v. Wyne, 200 A.D.2d 779 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994). “*780 Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of custodial interference in the first degree and…”

Schrotenboer v. Soloff, 549 N.E.2d 458 (NY 1989). “When the children were not returned by July 31, with no word of their whereabouts, their mother contacted the authorities, and on August 3, a warrant was issued for petitioner’s arrest, for the felony of custodial interference in the first degree (Penal Law § 135.50 [1]). Some…”

People v. McDonald, 147 Misc. 2d 33 (1990). · cites it 2× “(Penal Law § 135.50 [1].) Custodial interference in the second degree occurs when a person "[bjeing a relative of a child less than sixteen years old, intending to hold such child permanently or for a protracted period, and knowing that he has no legal *35 right to do so * * *…”

People v. Roth, 2021 NY Slip Op 06257 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021). “ctment and dismissing those counts of the indictment, and by amending the order of protection and as modified the judgment is affirmed and the matter is remitted to Ontario County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: On appeal from a…”

People v. Chamberlain, 278 A.D.2d 784 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). “Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her after a jury trial of custodial interference in the first degree (Penal Law § 135.50 [1]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review her challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence of the knowledge element of…”

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.