New York Assembly Bill A07791

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/10/25
• Refer: 4/10/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Adds to the definition of trespassing in the third degree, not having entered a lease or license for such building or real property with the rightful owner, enters or remains in such building or upon such real property or otherwise occupies such building or real property without title, right, permission of the rightful owner, or payment of rent accepted by the rightful owner.

Summary

This bill amends New York’s penal law on criminal trespass in the third degree. In addition to the existing railroad no-trespass provision, it adds a new subdivision covering a person who enters, remains in, or otherwise occupies a building or real property without having entered into a lease or license with the rightful owner, and without title, right, permission, or accepted payment of rent. The bill also preserves an affirmative defense for a defendant who is a “tenant” as defined in the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law. In practical terms, the proposal would expand the circumstances under which unauthorized occupancy of property can be prosecuted as third-degree criminal trespass. It appears aimed at situations involving unlawful occupation or squatting, while still recognizing lawful tenancy relationships as a defense. The bill would take effect immediately if enacted.

Impact

The bill would broaden Penal Law section 140.10 by creating a new trespass category for unauthorized entry or occupancy of buildings and real property where no lease, license, title, permission, or accepted rent exists. This could give prosecutors an additional criminal charge in disputes involving alleged squatters or other unauthorized occupants, while leaving intact the existing railroad no-trespass provision. It would also interact with landlord-tenant law by making tenant status under RPAPL section 711 an affirmative defense, thereby tying criminal trespass enforcement to civil definitions of tenancy and possession rights.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no documented legislative debate or recorded vote to indicate support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a policy preference for stronger enforcement against unauthorized occupancy, but the available record does not show whether lawmakers or stakeholders viewed it favorably or raised concerns.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the line between criminal trespass and civil landlord-tenant disputes. Supporters would likely view the bill as a tool to address squatting and unauthorized occupation of property, while critics may worry that it could criminalize housing disputes or be used against vulnerable occupants. The affirmative defense for tenants suggests an effort to avoid sweeping in lawful renters, but questions could still arise over who qualifies as a tenant, how proof of permission or rent acceptance is established, and whether the criminal law is the appropriate mechanism for resolving possession disputes.