N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Penal / PART Specific Offenses / TITLE Offenses Against Public Order, Public Sensibilities and the Right to Privacy / ARTICLE Offenses Against Public Order
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Penal Law § 240.10 (2026)

Unlawful assembly

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 240.10 Unlawful assembly.
  A person is guilty of unlawful assembly when he assembles with four or
more other persons for the purpose of engaging or preparing to engage
with them in tumultuous and violent conduct likely to cause public
alarm, or when, being present at an assembly which either has or
develops such purpose, he remains there with intent to advance that
purpose.
  Unlawful assembly is a class B misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1991–2024 · leading case: People v. Biltsted, 150 Misc. 2d 872 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Biltsted, 150 Misc. 2d 872 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 1991). · cites it 6× “Defendants have moved to dismiss the charges of unlawful *873 assembly filed against each of them under Penal Law § 240.10, stemming from incidents alleged to have occurred on May 1, 1990 in Tompkins Square Park.”
Papineau v. Parmley, 465 F.3d 46 (2d Cir. 2006). “N.Y. Penal Law § 240.10 . Conviction under this law requires “an incitement which is both directed towards and likely to produce imminent violent and tumultuous conduct.”
In re Christopher M., 94 A.D.3d 1119 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). “05) and unlawful assembly (Penal Law § 240.10). In a supporting affidavit, the arresting officer stated that, on a public street in Brooklyn, he observed two large groups of individuals, one of which included the respondent, facing each other and “threatening” each other.”
People v. Lopez, 2 Misc. 3d 843 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 2003). · cites it 3× “) The defendant is charged in count one with violating Penal Law § 240.10, unlawful assembly. A person is guilty of unlawful assembly when “he assembles with four or more other persons for the purpose of engaging or preparing to engage with them in tumultuous and violent conduct…”
In re Barbara M., 298 A.D.2d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002). “, 293 AD2d 373 , 373-374), the credible evidence “warranted a reasonable inference that appellant and a group of other youths advanced upon a group of police officers in a subway station with the joint purpose of engaging in ‘tumultuous and violent conduct likely to cause public…”
In re Christopher M., 29 Misc. 3d 1096 (N.Y.C. Fam. Ct. 2010). · cites it 6× “05), unlawful assembly (Penal Law § 240.10) and inciting to riot (Penal Law § 240.”
People v. Sanchez, 25 Misc. 3d 1104 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 2009). · cites it 3× “The defendants, Jose Sanchez, Julian Cuevas, Eduardo Hernandez and Jesus Quiles, are charged, acting in concert, with unlawful assembly (Penal Law § 240.10) and violating New York City Parks and Recreation Department Rules (56 RCNY) § 1-05 (a) (1), entitled “Assemblies,…”
People v. Biltsted, 151 Misc. 2d 620 (N.Y. City Crim. Ct. 1991). · cites it 2× “05], unlawful assembly [Penal Law § 240.10], resisting arrest [Penal Law § 205.”
People v. M.R., 12 Misc. 3d 671 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “” (Brandenburg v Ohio, 395 US 444, 449 [1969]; US Const 1st Amend; see also People v Biltsted, 150 Misc 2d 872, 879-880 [Crim Ct, NY County 1991]; see also, Donnino, Practice Commentary, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 39, Penal Law § 240.10, at 342.) The statute must also be…”
Rusfeldt v. City of New York, New York (S.D.N.Y. 2024). “N.Y. Penal Law § 240.10 prohibits “unlawful assembly”: “A person is guilty of unlawful assembly when he assembles with four or more other persons for the purpose of engaging or preparing to engage with them in tumultuous and violent conduct likely to cause public alarm, or when,…”
People v. Jones, 2018 NY Slip Op 7752 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018). “While the Supreme Court promptly sustained an objection precluding Georg from conveying to the jury what the unnamed gang members had told him, the fact remains that the jury was made to understand that the basis for Georg's belief that the defendant was "preparing to engage .”
In re Danielle V., 293 A.D.2d 373 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002). “The evidence warranted a reasonable inference that appellant and a group of other youths advanced upon a group of police officers in a subway station with the joint purpose of engaging in “tumultuous and violent conduct *374 likely to cause public alarm,” within the meaning of…”
Show all 13 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.