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

N.Y. Penal Law § 190.79 (2026)

Identity theft in the second degree

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 190.79 Identity theft in the second degree.
  A person is guilty of identity theft in the second degree when such
person knowingly and with intent to defraud assumes the identity of
another person by presenting themself as that other person, or by acting
as that other person or by using personal identifying information of
that other person, and thereby:
  1. obtains goods, money, property or services or uses credit in the
name of such other person in an aggregate amount that exceeds five
hundred dollars; or
  2. causes financial loss to such person or to another person or
persons in an aggregate amount that exceeds five hundred dollars; or
  3. commits or attempts to commit a felony or acts as an accessory to
the commission of a felony; or
  4. commits the crime of identity theft in the third degree as defined
in section 190.78 of this article and has been previously convicted
within the last five years of identity theft in the third degree as
defined in section 190.78, identity theft in the second degree as
defined in this section, identity theft in the first degree as defined
in section 190.80, unlawful possession of personal identification
information in the third degree as defined in section 190.81, unlawful
possession of personal identification information in the second degree
as defined in section 190.82, unlawful possession of personal
identification information in the first degree as defined in section
190.83, unlawful possession of a skimmer device in the second degree as
defined in section 190.85, unlawful possession of a skimmer device in
the first degree as defined in section 190.86, grand larceny in the
fourth degree as defined in section 155.30, grand larceny in the third
degree as defined in section 155.35, grand larceny in the second degree
as defined in section 155.40 or grand larceny in the first degree as
defined in section 155.42 of this chapter.
  Identity theft in the second degree is a class E felony.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2010–2025 · leading case: People v. Roberts, 31 N.Y.3d 406 (N.Y. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Roberts, 31 N.Y.3d 406 (N.Y. 2018). · cites it 7× “At Roberts' trial on one count of identity theft in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.79) and two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.”
People v. Golb, 15 N.E.3d 805 (N.Y. 2014). “as pertinent here, a person commits identity theft in the second degree “when he or she knowingly and with intent *469 to defraud assumes the identity of another person by presenting himself or herself as that other person, or by acting as that other person or by using personal…”
People v. Hayes, 71 A.D.3d 1187 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). “Defendant was found guilty of identity theft based upon his knowing use of a credit card belonging to another to obtain more than $500 worth of goods (see Penal Law § 190.79 [1]) and of the three criminal possession of a forged instrument charges based upon his knowing…”
Doorley v. DeMarco, 106 A.D.3d 27 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). “In May 2012, Watford was charged by a second indictment with identity theft in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.79 [1]). The People alleged that “on or about and between” January 5 and 9, 2012, Watford assumed the identity of another individual and obtained in excess of $500.”
People v. Roberts, 138 A.D.3d 461 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). “*462 The identity theft conviction (Penal Law § 190.79 [3]) was not supported by legally sufficient evidence.”
People v. King, 116 A.D.3d 424 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). “Under the circumstances of the case, an attempt to commit fourth-degree grand larceny *426 would, satisfy the requirements of Penal Law § 190.79 (3), and there is no reasonable possibility that the jury convicted defendant of identity theft on an improper theory (see People v…”
The People v. Frederic Badji, 165 N.E.3d 1068 (N.Y. 2021). · cites it 2× “For the unauthorized use of the credit card number— officially referred to as the victim’s personal identifying information—defendant could have been prosecuted for second-degree identity theft, a class E felony (Penal Law § 190.79 -1- -2- No. 7 [1]). Instead, he was prosecuted…”
In re Schoenecker, 107 A.D.3d 113 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). · cites it 3× “The Departmental Disciplinary Committee now petitions this Court for an order, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (b), striking respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys on the ground that his Wisconsin felony conviction for identity theft, in violation of Wisconsin Statutes…”
People v. Golb, 102 A.D.3d 601 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). “The theory of that count was that in the commission of identity theft in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.79 [3]), defendant attempted to commit the felony of scheme to defraud in the first degree (Penal Law § 190.”
People v. Ivey, 2025 NY Slip Op 01525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2025). · cites it 2× “Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of identity theft in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.79 [1]). Defendant correctly contends, and the People correctly concede, that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal is invalid…”
In re Schoenecker, 107 A.D.3d 113 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). · cites it 3× “The Departmental Disciplinary Committee now petitions this Court for an order, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (b), striking respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys on the ground that his Wisconsin felony conviction for identity theft, in violation of Wisconsin Statutes…”
People v. Alba, 43 Misc. 3d 878 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2014). · cites it 2× “65 [1] [a]), and identity theft in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.79 [3]). In an omnibus motion, the defendant seeks, inter alia, dismissal of both counts of the indictment, the scheme to defraud count on statutory double jeopardy grounds, and the identity theft count for…”
Show all 20 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.