Senate Bill S2690A

                                BILL NUMBER:S2690

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the penal law, in relation to the unlawful disclosure of
personal information concerning a police officer

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
This proposal would amend Section 240.30 of the Penal Law, Aggravated
Harassment in the Second Degree, by adding a new subdivision five
thereto. This new subdivision would make it a class A misdemeanor to
disclose or disseminate, with intent to harass, annoy, threaten or
alarm, the residence address, private telephone number or any other
information identifying a police officer if the person disclosing
the information has no legitimate purpose and knows, or reasonably
should know, that his or her conduct is likely to cause reasonable
fear of material harm to the physical health, safety of propel1y of
such officer. a member of such officer's family, or a third party
with whom such officer is acquainted.

JUSTIFICATION:
A police officer's job is a dangerous and stressful one. In the course
of their jobs, officers routinely issue summonses and arrest
offenders, as well as stop, warn or otherwise prevent individuals
from committing criminal acts or quality-of-life offenses. Every
such encounter is potentially dangerous. Police officers know that
              

while they are on the job they may be the target of those who have
contempt for authority or a personal dislike of police. Police
officers accept this every day they report for duty, hut it goes far
beyond the reasonable demands of the job for officers and their
families to be placed in fear of someone disclosing their home
addresses, phone numbers or other identifying information in order to
harass, annoy, alarm or threaten them, either by direct disclosure or
by passing such information on to others. Further, in this new age of
technology, the threat becomes ever more dangerous, when simply
posting such information on a website can instantly disseminate it
widely.

The harassment of police officers, including police officers identified
as undercover officers, by the disclosure of personal
information about them and their families, is not a theoretical
problem. It actually occurs, and the victims have very limited
recourse because of a gap in the law. It is urgent to address this
problem as soon as possible.

State law currently recognizes the need to protect the confidentiality
of a police officer's personal information in certain circumstances.
Civil Rights Law § 50-a permits the disclosure of personnel records
only upon the consent of the officer or upon a lawful court order.
Public Officers Law § 89(7) exempts government disclosure of the home
address of a public employee pun:uant to the State Freedom of
Information Law.

In the context of discovery in criminal proceedings, Criminal
Procedure Law § 240.50(4) provides that "the personal residence
address of a police officer...shall not be required to be disclosed


except pursuant to an order issued by a court following a finding of
good cause." All of these laws are designed to protect the privacy of
police officers' personal information.

Yet apart from these circumstances, the law does not address the
situation where a person discloses personal identifying information
about a police officer for no legitimate purpose. but instead to
harass, threaten or alarm the officer. his or her family, or even
other police officers.

New York courts have made clear that the use of the language "no
legitimate purpose" is appropriate for the prohibition of
harassment-based crimes, such as stalking, in circumstances where
there is an "absence of reason or justification to engage someone,
other than to hound, frighten, intimidate or threaten." See People
v. Stuart, 100 N.Y.2d 412 (2003). Such language is similarly
appropriate for the comparatively serious problem of police officer
harassment addressed by this bill.

PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
S.2749 of 2009-10: Referred to Codes

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
90 days after it becomes law.