People v. Alvarez
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
1Per curiam
The District Attorney candidly concedes on this appeal that the conviction for disorderly conduct should be reversed because it may not be considered included in the violation of harassment, with which defendant was charged. Disorderly conduct requires proof of an element — “ intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof” (Penal Law, § 240.20) — which is not required to establish harassment —■ ‘ ‘ intent to harass, annoy or alarm *206another person ” (Penal Law, § 240.25). Since such additional element or fact must be shown in a case of disorderly…
2Cited by4 opinions
- People v. GingelloRochester City Court · 1971
- People v. DeignanOswego City Court · 1982
- People v. Brinker (Jason)Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2017
- People v. Ramirez (Greisy)Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2017