📄 Extracted Text (683 words)
Page 1
LexisNexis'
I of 100 DOCUMENTS
NEW YORK CONSOLIDATED LAW SERVICE
Copyright (c) 2005 Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.,
one of the LEXIS Publishing (TM) companies
All rights reserved
*** ARCHIVE ***
*** THIS SECTION IS CURRENT THROUGH THE 2005 SESSION ***
PENAL LAW
PART THREE. SPECIFIC OFFENSES
TITLE M. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH AND MORALS
ARTICLE 230. PROSTITUTION OFFENSES
NY CIS Penal 230.05 (2005)
0 230.05. Patronizing a prostitute in the second degree
A person is guilty of patronizing a prostitute in the second degree when, being over eighteen years of age, he
patronizes a prostitute and the person patronized is less than fourteen years of age.
Patronizing a prostitute in the second degree is a class E felony.
HISTORY: Add, L 1978, ch 627, B 2, eff Sept 1, 1978.
Former 0 230.05, add, L 1965, ch 1030, B I; renumbered 0 230.02, L 1978, ch 627, B I, eff Sept 1, 1978.
NOTES:
Commission Staff Notes
In substance, this section, which is new, makes it a violation for a person to hire or attempt to hire a prostitute or
anyone else to engage in sexual conduct with him.
Though not formerly an offense in New York, such "patronizing" conduct is proscribed in various forms by the penal
codes of several other jurisdictions, including the recently revised codes of Illinois and Wisconsin and it is included as
an offense in the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code (B 251.1[5]).
At the public hearings held by the Commission with respect to the new Penal Law, and in conferences and
correspondence with the Commission and its staff, a number of persons and organizations have strongly urged the
inclusion of a "patronizing" offense. The reasons most vigorously advanced are: (I) that criminal sanctions against the
patron as well as the prostitute should aid in the curtailment of prostitution; and (2) that to penalize the prostitute and
exempt the equally culpable patron is inherently unjust.
After consideration of these contentions, the Commission decided to include the indicated patronizing offense in the
new law (0 230.05) as a proper corollary to "prostitution" (0 230.00).
Following these two sections, it may be observed, a "no defense" provision has been added (0 230.10): this makes it
perfectly clear that both the "prostitution" and the "patronizing" offenses apply not only to the usual situation where a
female is hired by a male, but also to those where a male is hired by a male, a female by a female, and male by a female.
EFTA00722598
Page 2
NY CLS Penal B 230M5
New York References:
This section referred to in B 240.37; CLS Pub Health, 2324-a; CLS Real P Actions & Pr B 715; CLS RealPig 231
Research References & Practice Aids:
35B NY Jur 2d, Criminal Law BB 4931, 4977
Annotations:
Validity and construction of statute or ordinance proscribing solicitation for purposes of prostitution, lewdness, or
assignation-modem cases.77 ALR3d 519
Texts:
4 Frumer & Biskind, Bender's New York Evidence--CPLR J8 11.04
New York Criminal Practice Ch. 77
Criminal Jury Instructions, New York:
Patronizing a prostitute, second degree. CJI2d [NY] Penal Law, 230.05
Case Notes:
In order to prevail on a claim for malicious prosecution, one must establish the commencement or continuation of a
criminal proceeding by the defendant against the plaintiff, the termination of the proceeding in favor of the accused. the
absence of probable cause for the criminal proceeding, and actual malice. The trial court reversibly erred in omitting the
statutory definition of advancing prostitution and, although the defendants failure to object to the charge would
ordinarily be deemed a waiver, the error was fundamental where it related to the key factual issue of whether there had
been probable cause for the prosecution of defendant for advancing prostitution. Antonucci v Irondequoit (1981, 4th
Dept) 81 App Div 2d 743, 438 NYS2d 417.
PenalLaw,' 230.05 is violated when one person solicits another to engage in sexual contact in return for fee; it was
immaterial that person whom defendant patronized was not a prostitute, but a policewoman. People v Bronski (1973)
76 Misc 2d 341, 351NYS2d 73.
EFTA00722599
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
7dae208e7a6730c62cacc4e4973db7dd85919f5362ed0db98be137c207c12b70
Bates Number
EFTA00722598
Dataset
DataSet-9
Document Type
document
Pages
2
Comments 0