New York Consolidated Laws
N.Y. Penal Law § 35.10 (2026)
Justification; use of physical force generally
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NY-LEGnysenate.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 35.10 Justification; use of physical force generally. The use of physical force upon another person which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances: 1. A parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a person under the age of twenty-one or an incompetent person, and a teacher or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a person under the age of twenty-one for a special purpose, may use physical force, but not deadly physical force, upon such person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare of such person. 2. A warden or other authorized official of a jail, prison or correctional institution may, in order to maintain order and discipline, use such physical force as is authorized by the correction law. 3. A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common carrier of passengers, or a person acting under his direction, may use physical force when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order, but he may use deadly physical force only when he reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury. 4. A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical injury upon himself may use physical force upon such person to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to thwart such result. 5. A duly licensed physician, or a person acting under a physician's direction, may use physical force for the purpose of administering a recognized form of treatment which he or she reasonably believes to be adapted to promoting the physical or mental health of the patient if (a) the treatment is administered with the consent of the patient or, if the patient is under the age of eighteen years or an incompetent person, with the consent of the parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the patient's care and supervision, or (b) the treatment is administered in an emergency when the physician reasonably believes that no one competent to consent can be consulted and that a reasonable person, wishing to safeguard the welfare of the patient, would consent. 6. A person may, pursuant to the ensuing provisions of this article, use physical force upon another person in self-defense or defense of a third person, or in defense of premises, or in order to prevent larceny of or criminal mischief to property, or in order to effect an arrest or prevent an escape from custody. Whenever a person is authorized by any such provision to use deadly physical force in any given circumstance, nothing contained in any other such provision may be deemed to negate or qualify such authorization.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 54
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1977–2025 · leading case: Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977).
Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977). “§ 28-840 (2) (1975); N. Y. Penal Law § 35.10 (McKinney 1975 and Supp.”
Willis v. State, 888 N.E.2d 177 (Ind. 2008). “§ 28-1413 (1995); N.Y. Penal Law § 35.10 (Supp.2008); N.D. Cent.”
In re Peter G., 6 A.D.3d 201 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). “, 201 AD2d 342 [1994]); they are guilty of neglect if they use “excessive corporal punishment” (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; see Penal Law § 35.10 [1] [a parent may use “physical force .”
In re Delehia J., 93 A.D.3d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). “, 63 AD3d 948 [2009]; see also Penal Law § 35.10; Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]).”
Matter of Nicole J. v. Joshua J., 2022 NY Slip Op 03780 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022). “, 70 AD3d 1220, 1221 [2010]; see Penal Law § 35.10 [1]). "In determining whether a parent's belief regarding the need to use physical force to maintain discipline was reasonable, the trier of fact must consider whether a reasonable person in the same position as the parent would…”
In re Isaiah S., 63 A.D.3d 948 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009). “Although parents have a right to use reasonable physical force “to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare” of their children (Penal Law § 35.10 [1]), the use of “excessive corporal punishment” constitutes neglect (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]).”
In re Collin H., 28 A.D.3d 806 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). “, supra at 342-343; see also Penal Law § 35.10 [1]), “excessive corporal punishment” as used here is specifically prohibited and constitutes neglect (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]).”
In re Aaliyah Q., 55 A.D.3d 969 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). “Upon our review of the record, we conclude that Family Court’s finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]).”
Fosmire v. Nicoleau, 551 N.E.2d 77 (NY 1990). “The State will intervene to prevent suicide (Penal Law § 35.10 [4], [5] [b]) or the self-inflicted injuries of the mentally deranged (Rivers v Katz, supra, at 495-496 ).”
Commonwealth v. Dorvil, 32 N.E.3d 861 (Mass. 2015). “430 ; N.Y. Penal Law § 35.10 ; Tex. Penal Code §9.”
Reed v. State of New York, 574 N.E.2d 433 (NY 1991). “” The affirmation further stated that if claimant had caused the decedent’s death in self-defense, that act was not a criminal act under Penal Law § 35.10, and it invoked the presumption of innocence.”
In re Padmine M., 84 A.D.3d 806 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). “, 63 AD3d 948, 949 [2009]; see also Penal Law § 35.10 [1]). However, a parent’s use of excessive corporal punishment constitutes neglect (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; Matter of Isaiah S.”
— N.Y. Penal Law § 35.10(1) — 1 case
Suss v. Am. Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 823 F. Supp. 181 (S.D.N.Y. 1993).
— N.Y. Penal Law § 35.10(2) — 2 cases
People v. Overton, 2024 NY Slip Op 03767 (N.Y. App. Div. 2024).
People v. Rivera, 2018 NY Slip Op 9024 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018).
— N.Y. Penal Law § 35.10(6) — 1 case
People v. Jimenez, 2020 NY Slip Op 07223 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020).
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.