New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Penal Law § 140.20 (2026)

Burglary in the third degree

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 140.20 Burglary in the third degree.
  A person is guilty of burglary in the third degree when he knowingly
enters or remains unlawfully in a building with intent to commit a crime
therein.
  Burglary in the third degree is a class D felony.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 559 cases (54 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: People v. Cahill, 809 N.E.2d 561 (NY 2003).
People v. Cahill, 809 N.E.2d 561 (NY 2003). · cites it 4× “Burglary in the third degree covers the unlawful entry of any building, even if it is not a dwelling, and does not require that the perpetrator be armed with a weapon ( see Penal Law § 140.20). By excluding burglary in the third degree from the class of felonies underlying the…”
United States v. Cesar Bernel-Aveja, 844 F.3d 206 (5th Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “5/19-1 (West 2003) 118 N.Y. PENAL LAW § 140.20 (McKinney 2010) 119 But the focus of the present case is what “generic” burglary requires regarding intent when the statute of conviction was an unlawful entry or remaining in statute.”
People v. Seeber, 826 N.E.2d 797 (NY 2005). · cites it 2× “A person is guilty of burglary who "knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building with intent to commit a crime therein" (Penal Law § 140.20). But, from all that appears in the allocution, defendant and her codefendant were lawfully present in her grandmother's house.”
United States v. Paul Prater, 766 F.3d 501 (6th Cir. 2014). · cites it 4× “” N.Y. Penal Law § 140.20 . A “building” includes “its ordinary meaning” and also “any structure, 3 The district court adopted the presentence report without change.”
People v. Mahboubian, 543 N.E.2d 34 (NY 1989). · cites it 2× “Defendants argue that the evidence *193 was insufficient to prove their intent that Cardebat and company "commit a crime therein” — that is, within the warehouse — as required by Penal Law § 140.20. They argue that because the crime they were charged with having ultimately…”
People v. Cox, 707 N.E.2d 428 (NY 1998). · cites it 4× “Here, even assuming that Copeland committed a burglary by entering Brewster's apartment with the intent to commit an assault (Penal Law § 140.20), the trial court did not err in refusing to charge justification.”
People v. Barney, 786 N.E.2d 31 (NY 2003). · cites it 3× “A person commits burglary in the third degree when he or she “knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building with intent to commit a crime therein” (Penal Law § 140.20). There is a two-part test to determine whether a lesser included offense charge should be submitted to a…”
People v. Muniz, 547 N.E.2d 1160 (NY 1989). · cites it 3× “Applying these principles to the facts in the present case, we conclude that the statutory elements of the New Jersey crime of which defendant was convicted, which requires an intent to commit any "offense,” differ materially from the elements of its closest New York analog,…”
United States v. Folkes, 622 F.3d 152 (2d Cir. 2010). · cites it 4× “It is undisputed that in October 1996, an Immigration Judge had ordered Folkes deported because of a conviction in New York State for third-degree burglary, N.Y. Penal Law § 140.20 . Folkes was indicted in November 2008 on illegal reentry and identity theft charges, as well as…”
Brogdon v. City of New Rochelle, 200 F. Supp. 2d 411 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). · cites it 2× “*417 Prior Pertinent Proceedings Officer Benge signed a felony complaint prepared by the Office of the District Attorney of Westchester County charging both plaintiff and a co-defendant, Kelvin Wilson, with burglary in the third degree ( N.Y. Penal Law § 140.20 ). 1 Benge Afft ¶…”
United States v. Michael Herrold, 883 F.3d 517 (5th Cir. 2018). “§ 2C:18-2 (1981) ; N.Y. Penal Law § 140.20 (McKinney 1979) ; Or.”
People v. Gaines, 546 N.E.2d 913 (NY 1989). · cites it 2× “” (Penal Law § 140.20.) The issue before us is whether, in this case of unlawful entry, the jury should have been instructed that they must find defendant’s intent to commit a crime in the building existed at the *360 time of the entry, or whether no such instruction need have…”
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.