Recent appellate decisions in New York call into question the foundational definition of domestic violence, which should be a matter of concern to attorneys who represent victims. These decisions, one issued by the Court of Appeals, and conflicting decisions from two appellate divisions, expose the fact that the definition of a family offense in New York is not based on specific acts or conduct, but rather on references to various sections of the Penal Law.
On May 14, 2014, the Court of Appeals, in People v. Golb,1 declared unconstitutional Penal Law §240.30(1)(a), aggravated harassment in the second degree. This is a principal section used in Family Court to allege a family offense by litigants seeking an order of protection.2 The court found the statute unconstitutionally vague and overbroad because it did not clearly define the scope of the proscribed speech which tended to “annoy” and therefore cause alarm.3
