N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Penal / PART Specific Offenses / TITLE Offenses Involving Fraud / ARTICLE Other Frauds
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (2026)

Criminal impersonation in the second degree

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 190.25 Criminal impersonation in the second degree.
  A person is guilty of criminal impersonation in the second degree when
he:
  1. Impersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with
intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another; or
  2. Pretends to be a representative of some person or organization and
does an act in such pretended capacity with intent to obtain a benefit
or to injure or defraud another; or
  3. (a) Pretends to be a public servant, or wears or displays without
authority any uniform, badge, insignia or facsimile thereof by which
such public servant is lawfully distinguished, or falsely expresses by
his words or actions that he is a public servant or is acting with
approval or authority of a public agency or department; and (b) so acts
with intent to induce another to submit to such pretended official
authority, to solicit funds or to otherwise cause another to act in
reliance upon that pretense; or
  4. Impersonates another by communication by internet website or
electronic means with intent to obtain a benefit or injure or defraud
another, or by such communication pretends to be a public servant in
order to induce another to submit to such authority or act in reliance
on such pretense; or
  5. Impersonates another person, without such other person's
permission, by using the other person's electronic signature with intent
to obtain a benefit or injure or defraud the other person or another
person. For the purposes of this subdivision, electronic signature shall
have the same meaning as set forth in subdivision three of section three
hundred two of the state technology law.
  Criminal impersonation in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 75 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Breitkopf v. Gentile, 41 F. Supp. 3d 220 (E.D.N.Y 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Breitkopf v. Gentile, 41 F. Supp. 3d 220 (E.D.N.Y 2014). · cites it 10× “The Court similarly concludes that the Section 205-e claim against Cafarella, based upon an alleged violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (3), survives summary judgment, because there are issues of fact as to whether Cafarella was trying to induce Breitkopf and/or other police…”
People v. Golb, 15 N.E.3d 805 (N.Y. 2014). · cites it 4× “A person is guilty of this crime when he or she “[impersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another” (Penal Law § 190.25 [1]). The criminal impersonation counts related to defendant’s actions against…”
Christian v. Town of Riga, 649 F. Supp. 2d 84 (W.D.N.Y. 2009). · cites it 3× “New York State Penal Law Claims Insofar as the Amended Complaint attempts to assert violations of the New York State Penal Law premised on Penal Law § 195 (Counts 4, 6 and 19), Penal law § 190 (Counts 10, 12 and 14), Penal Law § 190.25 (Count 14) and Penal Law § 190.”
People v. Sinha, 84 A.D.3d 35 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). “In addition, the jury found defendant guilty of eight misdemeanors, four counts each of criminal impersonation in the second *39 degree (Penal Law § 190.25 [1]) and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree (Penal Law § 240.”
Reisha Simpson v. City of New York, 793 F.3d 259 (2d Cir. 2015). “N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (3). Officer Nelson argued on summary judgment that he had reason to believe that Ms.”
Golb v. Attorney Gen. of the State of New York, 870 F.3d 89 (2d Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “] N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (1). The forgery statute provides: A person is guilty of forgery in the third degree when, with intent to defraud, deceive or injure another, he falsely makes, completes or alters a written instrument.”
State v. Abigail Marie Stubbs, 502 S.W.3d 218 (Tex. App. 2016). “§ 97-45-33(a) ("any person who knowingly and without consent impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet website or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening or defrauding another person is guilty of a misdemeanor”); N.Y. Penal…”
People v. Mitchell, 254 A.D.2d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998). · cites it 2× “25 [2]) and criminal im *831 personation in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.25 [2]). There is no merit to the contention of defendant that his conviction of burglary in the second degree is not supported by legally sufficient evidence of an unlawful entry or his intent to…”
United States v. Christopher Thomas, AKA Chris Reese, AKA Chris Thomas, 299 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 2002). “There are numerous federal, state, and local laws barring possession of, creation of, and transactions involving false identifying documents and criminal impersonation.”
Evans v. State, 212 A.3d 308 (Del. Super. Ct. 2019). “48 Compare N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (McKinney 2018) ("A person is guilty of criminal impersonation in the second degree when he .”
People v. Hooks, 71 A.D.3d 1184 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). “This evidence was legally sufficient to establish defendant’s guilt of criminal impersonation in the second degree (see Penal Law § 190.25 [1]). While defendant raised some questions about the victim’s motives and pointed out shortfalls in the police investigation, if we give…”
People v. Sanchez, 643 N.E.2d 509 (N.Y. 1994). “One can impersonate another with the intent to defraud (Penal Law § 190.25) with a single act or a series of acts constituting a pattern of behavior.”
Show all 75 citing cases →
N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25(1): 1 case
Matter of Lefkowitz, 2018 NY Slip Op 5164 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018).
N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25(2): 2 cases
Yemeni-Am. Assn., Corp. v. Alsaede, 2024 NY Slip Op 50078(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Bronx Cty. 2024).
Yemeni-Am. Assn., Corp. v. Alsaede, 2024 NY Slip Op 50078(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Bronx Cty. 2024).
N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25(3): 1 case
Breitkopf v. Gentile, 41 F. Supp. 3d 220 (E.D.N.Y 2014). “The Court similarly concludes that the Section 205-e claim against Cafarella, based upon an alleged violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (3), survives summary judgment, because there are issues of fact as to whether Cafarella was trying to induce Breitkopf and/or other police…”
N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25(e): 1 case
Breitkopf v. Gentile, 41 F. Supp. 3d 220 (E.D.N.Y 2014). “The Court similarly concludes that the Section 205-e claim against Cafarella, based upon an alleged violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 (3), survives summary judgment, because there are issues of fact as to whether Cafarella was trying to induce Breitkopf and/or other police…”
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.