Criminal Interference in New York

What puts a person or entity at risk of prosecution?

An individual may find themselves at risk of prosecution for Criminal Interference in New York if they are found guilty of causing a disruption or disturbance of a religious service, funeral, burial, or memorial service, or if they use force, a threat of force, or physical obstruction to prevent someone from obtaining reproductive health services or exercising their right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship.

Depending upon the severity of the interference, a person who is found guilty of Criminal Interference in New York may be received either a class A misdemeanor, or class E felony sentence. This means that if convicted for Criminal Interference in New York, you could possibly spend up to four years in prison.

Because charges for this crime carry with them significant jail time, it is very important to consult with a skilled criminal defense attorney like the ones at our firm in order to help protect your liberty.

The Legal Definition of Criminal Interference

N.Y. Penal Law § 240.21 and §§ 240.70-72, sets out the legal definition of Criminal Interference in New York. Criminal Interference can be either a misdemeanor or a felony under state criminal laws. There are two forms of Criminal Interference in New York: “Disruption or disturbance” and “Criminal Interference.”

The “elements” of Criminal Interference are the things that the prosecutor must prove in order for you to be found guilty of this offense. Basically, for a defendant to be convicted in a criminal trial for Criminal Interference under N.Y. Penal Law § 240.21 and §§ 240.70-72, a prosecutor must prove that all of the following are true for one of the two forms of Criminal Interference.

Disruption or Disturbance:

You must have caused a disruption or disturbance
That disruption or disturbance must have interfered with a religious service, funeral, burial, or memorial service.

Criminal Interference:

You must have used force, the threat of force, or physical obstruction
To intimidate or interfere with
A person obtaining or providing reproductive health services or seeking to exercise the right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship. Let’s delve a bit more deeply into these elements to understand their meaning better.

Element #1: Disruption or Disturbance

The definition of Disruption or Disturbance is undertaking an action that results in significant interference.
In People v. King, the court found that protesters who laid down in the center aisle, and who handcuffed themselves to church pews, had caused a disturbance.
This element applies to intentional behavior that is designed to interfere.
For example, Thomas attends church service, and when the offering plate is passed around, he grabs it and throws it like a frisbee. Thomas would likely be found to have caused a disturbance.

Element #2: Threat or Use of Force, and Physical Obstruction

The definition of Threat or Use of Force and Physical Obstruction is the use of a threat of violence, the use of violence against someone, or physically obstructing that person.
In People of State of New York ex rel. Spitzer v. Kraeger, it was held that acts such as hitting, pushing, shoving, kicking, and knocking over an escort constitute use of force.
This element applies to those that use violent actions, or threat of violence, or physical obstruction to prevent a person from accessing something.
For example, if Thomas from the above example had thrown the offering plate at the minister leading the religious service, he would likely be found to have used force.

Element #3: Person attempting to use Reproductive Services or Exercise Religious Freedom

The definition of a Person attempting to use Reproductive Services or Exercise Religious Freedom is someone who is attempting to seek medical care for Reproductive Services or to exercise their religious rights.
In People of State of New York ex rel. Spitzer v. Kraeger, it was held that women seeking counseling for abortions were seeking medical care for reproductive services.[4]
This element applies to women seeking abortions and to individuals seeking to exercise their religious liberties.
For example, if Thomas from the above example had barricaded the doors of the church before service, he would likely be found to have acted against people seeking to exercise their religious freedom.

Related Offenses

Charges of Criminal Interference may be brought in addition to, or in place of, charges for certain other related offenses, including:

Related Offense #1: Disorderly Conduct

The definition of Disorderly conduct is engaging in violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior, making unreasonable noise, using abusive or obscene language in a public place.
This law is encoded in N.Y. Penal Law § 240.20 (McKinney).
Effectively this law is against causing a disturbance that causes a breach of the peace.
In People v. Kennedy, it was held that blocking police and firemen from performing their duties constituted Disorderly Conduct.
If Thomas, from the above examples, had shouted obscene words while interrupting the church service, he might have also been charged with disorderly conduct.

Related Offense #2: Harassment

The definition of Harassment is intentionally and repeatedly committing acts that place another person in fear.
In People v. Rusciano, it was held that activity must be repeated in order for it to constitute harassment.
Effectively, this law is against repeated conduct that is designed to place another person in fear.
If Thomas from the above examples, had made repeated calls to the church threatening violent conduct, then he would likely be charged with harassment.

Essential and Impactful Cases

There are a handful of essential and impactful cases that have further defined and refined the statutory law surrounding Criminal Interference in New York.

In People v. Morrisey, it was held that a protestor who attempted to seize a microphone from a priest in order to loudly pray the rosary was guilty of Disrupting a Religious Service.

Here, the mere fact that the protesters attempted to steal the microphone in order to conduct a prayer was not sufficient to overcome his violent action. Here the violent action of seizing the microphone rather than the prayer itself constituted Disrupting a Religious Service.

In People of State of New York ex rel. Spitzer v. Kraeger, it was held that the Standards for proving a violation of the New York Criminal Interference Law with respect to reproductive health service centers are the same as those for proving a violation of Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE).

In order to establish a violation, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant (1) engaged in acts of force, threats of force, or physical obstruction, (2) with the intent to injure, intimidate, or interfere with a person who (3) sought or provided, or is seeking to provide reproductive health services.

In People v. McDaniel, it was held that while the statute does specifically protect religious services from disruption, the statute does not impermissibly advance religion over nonreligion. This ruling is important because it shows that the law falls within the acceptable bounds of the first amendment.

What agencies detect, investigate, and prosecute this crime?

Criminal Interference in New York is generally investigated by local police departments and prosecuted by local district attorneys’ offices. Depending upon the scale of the criminal interference and the actions involved, there may be additional agencies involved.

Activities that involve firearms may also be investigated by the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Activities that involve individuals who have travelled between states may also involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation and possibly federal prosecutors.

Penalties for Violating N.Y. Penal Law § 240.21 and §§ 240.70-72:

Criminal Interference can be either a misdemeanor or a felony depending upon the form of the crime that is charged. The potential penalties include:

The penalties for Disruption or disturbance of a religious service, funeral, burial, or memorial service under N.Y. Penal Law § 240.21, Criminal interference with health care services or religious worship in the second degree under N.Y. Penal Law § 240.70 are those of class A misdemeanors and range from no jail time with probation up to 1-year imprisonment.
The penalties for Criminal interference with health care services or religious worship in the first degree under N.Y. Penal Law § 240.71, and Aggravated interference with health care services in the second degree under N.Y. Penal Law § 240.72 are those of class E felonies and range from no jail time with probation up to 4 years imprisonment.

The penalty for Aggravated interference with health care services in the first degree under N.Y. Penal Law § 240.73 are those of a C felony and range from 1-year imprisonment up to 15 years imprisonment.

Sentencing Enhancements

There are no traditional sentencing enhancements for Criminal Interference; however, depending on the details of a crime and an individual’s criminal history, prosecutors may charge a higher degree of the offense.

For example, someone who has previously been convicted of criminal interference with health care services or religious worship in the second degree and who is again charged may be charged in the first degree. Similarly, if someone causes injury or severe injury, they may be charged with aggravated criminal interference with health care services or religious worship.

These enhancements can raise the possible sentence from a maximum of up to one year in prison to a maximum of up to fifteen years in prison and can, therefore, be very substantial enhancements.

Consequences of Conviction

There can be serious consequences if you are convicted of Criminal Interference in New York. Some categories of this crime are charged as felonies and carry with them serious felony enhancements. You may face serious immigration consequences if you are not a United States Citizen.

Even legal permanent residents who are convicted of Criminal Interference may find their immigration statuses revoked and find themselves subject to deportation. Additionally, you risk losing access to government grant programs for education, and your right to own firearms in the State of New York.

Generally speaking, if you are convicted, you may also be subject to serious social consequences. You may have your actions brought up against you by other members of your community and may find yourself facing serious social stigma should you be convicted.

Legal Defenses to Criminal Interference

Nobody wants to go to jail or pay a fine—and nobody wants a conviction for Criminal Interference on their record.

People may start to associate you with this crime, even though they do not understand the specifics of your case. There are several powerful legal defenses you can use to fight these charges. They include:

Defense #1: No Intent

One of the defenses for Criminal Interference is that the defendant must have been demonstrated to have acted intentionally to be convicted.
In People v. King, the court found that protesters who laid down in the center aisle, and who handcuffed themselves to church pews, had caused a disturbance.
The actions of the people in People v. King show the element of intent present in the crime.
Here, had those individuals been handcuffed to church pews unwillingly by a third party they would not have been found guilty of Criminal Interference.

Defense #2: Acting in accordance with Religious Dogma

The second defense for Criminal Interference is that the defendant’s actions were motivated by accordance with religious teachings.
In People v. Steele, the court declined to rule against churchgoers who laid during the center aisle of a cathedral during high mass. They argued that what they did was proper under Catholic tradition because the Sacred Liturgy encouraged them to take part in the ceremony with bodily gestures and attitudes.
The court ruled that it would not engage in the forbidden process of interpreting and weighing church doctrine.
This defense is likely quite limited, though as their actions did not directly affect the rights of another person. If they had, for example, been following their religious teachings to block women from attending a male-only church service that was open to all attendees, then it is possible they may be charged with Criminal Interference.

These are only some of the defenses a skilled defense attorney may employ to help defend you or your loved ones should you be charged with a Criminal Interference charge. Defenses generally seek to either nullify one of the elements of the crime or to explain why your actions do not satisfy that element.

A skilled defense attorney like the ones at our firm will help you carefully select the most powerful defenses to help ensure you the best possible outcome.

Call us for help

For questions about Criminal Interference and N.Y. Penal Law § 240.21 and §§ 240.70-72, or to discuss your case confidentially with one of our criminal defense attorneys, do not hesitate to contact us. Our attorneys understand New York criminal law and can help you with all aspects of your case.

Our attorneys understand how to handle negotiations with prosecutors, interviews with police and other investigatory agencies. We can help you put on the best possible defense in order to secure your liberty.

Criminal Interference charges can carry with them serious jail time and other repercussions. If you or a loved one has been charged with Criminal Interference, please do not hesitate to contact us. We have local criminal law offices in your area.