Requires certain sentences for aggravated criminal contempt to be served consecutively.
Summary
This bill amends New York’s Penal Law definition of aggravated criminal contempt and adds a new sentencing rule for one specific form of that offense. Under current law, aggravated criminal contempt is committed in several circumstances involving violations of orders of protection and repeat contempt offenses. The bill adds a fourth category: committing criminal contempt in the second degree while confined in a state or local correctional facility. It also makes a series of gender-neutral drafting changes, replacing references to “he or she” with “the defendant.”
The bill further amends the sentencing statute to require consecutive sentences when a person is convicted of this new correctional-facility-based aggravated criminal contempt offense after arraignment but before sentencing on a pending felony charge, and when imprisonment is imposed in both cases. The measure takes effect immediately and would apply to sentencing decisions under the Penal Law and Correction Law framework governing contempt offenses and incarceration-related conduct.
Impact
The bill expands the conduct that can qualify as aggravated criminal contempt by adding contempt committed inside a correctional facility or local correctional facility. Because aggravated criminal contempt is a class D felony, the amendment increases criminal exposure for incarcerated individuals who violate the specified contempt provision. It also creates a mandatory consecutive-sentencing rule in a narrow circumstance, limiting judicial discretion when the new offense is committed after arraignment on a pending felony charge and both cases result in imprisonment. The bill affects Penal Law sections 215.52 and 70.25 and references the Correction Law definition of local correctional facility.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and sentencing enhancement bill, with a straightforward punitive approach toward contempt offenses occurring in custody. The drafting changes are neutral and technical, while the substantive change is more punitive.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the new mandatory consecutive-sentencing requirement, which reduces judicial discretion and can increase total incarceration time. Another likely issue is the expansion of aggravated criminal contempt to conduct occurring in correctional facilities, which may be viewed as necessary to deter in-custody misconduct by some and as overly harsh by others. No specific legislators, advocates, or opponents are identified in the provided record, and there is no transcript evidence showing formal disagreement.