new york penal code 120 16 hazing in the first degree

New York Penal Code 120.16 Hazing in the First Degree

Hazing has unfortunately become a common ritual for initiating new members into student organizations and fraternities. While hazing is often seen as a harmless rite of passage, it can sometimes cross the line into dangerous and even criminal behavior. New York Penal Code 120.16 specifically prohibits hazing that causes serious physical injury, and makes it a felony offense. Let’s take a closer look at what constitutes hazing under this law, penalties for violating it, and what defenses may apply.

What Activities Are Considered Hazing?

Under Penal Code 120.16, hazing involves any intentional or reckless act committed during the course of initiating a person into an organization that results in serious physical injury. This covers student groups, fraternities, sororities, athletic teams, military organizations, or any other kind of club or society. The hazing act itself does not necessarily have to be inherently dangerous or harmful. Even relatively benign activities like calisthenics or scavenger hunts could be considered hazing if they result in serious injuries due to recklessness or dangerous conditions.

Some examples of activities that are often involved in criminal hazing cases include:

• Forcing excessive alcohol consumption
• Beating, paddling, or other violent physical punishments
• Branding or tattooing
• Extreme physical challenges like over-exertion, exposure to extreme weather, or sleep deprivation
• Psychological intimidation like verbal abuse or humiliation

It’s important to understand that even if the victim consents to the activity, it can still legally be considered hazing under Penal Code 120.16 if serious injury results. The key is that the activity was intentionally or recklessly imposed as part of an initiation process.

What Injuries Qualify as “Serious Physical Injury”?

For a hazing incident to rise to the level of a first-degree offense, it must cause “serious physical injury.” Under New York law, this means physical injury that creates a substantial risk of death, or causes serious disfigurement, impairment of health, or loss or impairment of any bodily organ. Some examples that would likely meet the threshold include:

• Brain damage
• Skull fractures
• Loss of sight or hearing
• Internal bleeding
• Injuries requiring surgery

If the activity “merely” causes physical impairment or substantial pain, it would likely be charged as a lower-level hazing offense rather than under Penal Code 120.16. But any activity that recklessly endangers initiates could potentially lead to catastrophic injuries that qualify as serious.

Penalties Under New York Law

A conviction under Penal Code 120.16 for first-degree hazing is a class D felony. This is punishable by up to 7 years in prison. Fines up to $5,000 may also be imposed. Additionally, any organization or school group involved in the hazing may be subject to civil liability for negligence if they failed to take reasonable precautions against dangerous initiation activities. They could be sued for substantial monetary damages by the injured victim and their family.

It’s important to understand that hazing doesn’t only threaten the direct participants. Officers or leaders of an organization can also be prosecuted as accomplices to first-degree hazing if they are aware of dangerous initiation activities and don’t make reasonable efforts to stop it. Simply looking the other way could lead to criminal liability.

Possible Defenses

Fighting a hazing charge under Penal Code 120.16 requires proving that one or more elements of the crime are not met. Some potential defenses include:

• The accused did not intentionally or recklessly impose or permit the activity as an initiation ritual. For example, they may claim it was purely voluntary horseplay not connected to any initiation.
• The injury does not meet the legal definition of “serious physical injury.” The defense may argue it was a minor or moderate injury not covered by the statute.
• The defendant was not aware of the activity and could not have reasonably prevented it. For example, a fraternity president may claim rogue members acted without their knowledge.
• The victim consented to the activity and assumed the risks. However, this is often ineffective since consent does not negate criminal liability.

Raising reasonable doubt about any of these factors could potentially defeat the charges. But given the broad scope of the hazing statute, a conviction can often be avoided most effectively by negotiating a plea deal to a lesser offense.

Changes to New York Law in 2018

After a tragic hazing incident at Penn State in 2017 resulted in a student death, there was an effort to strengthen New York’s anti-hazing laws. As a result, several amendments were made that took effect in 2018.

Most significantly, the legal definition of “serious physical injury” in the hazing statutes was expanded to include injury causing a “substantial risk of death.” This lowers the injury threshold and makes it easier to prosecute first-degree hazing in cases where the victim narrowly avoids death.

In addition, consent of the victim is now explicitly ruled out as a defense under the law. So even if initiates willingly participate, it does not absolve organizers of liability if serious injury results.

Finally, the amended law requires all school employees, advisors, and volunteers to report any known hazing incidents to law enforcement. Failing to report hazing became a new class A misdemeanor offense.

These changes demonstrate that New York is taking an increasingly strict stance against dangerous hazing activities, even when participants are willing. Responsible oversight and prevention by organizations is critical.

Examples of Criminal Hazing Prosecutions in New York

Several high-profile hazing cases have been prosecuted under Penal Code 120.16 and related statutes:

• People v. Lam (2019) – A Baruch College fraternity pledge died during a hazing ritual known as the “glass ceiling,” involving dangerous physical challenges. The fraternity president was convicted of first-degree hazing and sentenced to 12 weeks in jail plus probation.[1]
• People v. Morgo (2012) – A Cornell University sophomore died of alcohol poisoning during a Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity hazing event. The fraternity president pleaded guilty to first-degree hazing and was sentenced to three years probation. [2]
• People v. Fordham (2005) – A Plattsburgh State lacrosse player suffered hypothermia when forced to swim in a near-freezing lake as part of a team hazing. The team captain was convicted of second-degree hazing and sentenced to six months in jail. [3]

These cases show that first-degree hazing charges are pursued when initiations result in catastrophic injuries or death, even if not intended. Responsible oversight is key to avoiding legal liability.

Preventing Criminal Hazing as an Organization

Ultimately, the most effective way for an organization to avoid legal jeopardy under Penal Code 120.16 is to proactively prevent dangerous hazing. Strategies include:

• Adopt a formal zero-tolerance hazing policy
• Educate members regularly about hazing risks
• Ensure activities don’t place excessive physical or mental demands on new members
• Require senior members to monitor initiations
• Follow university anti-hazing rules and guidance
• Make it easy for members to anonymously report concerning behavior
• Quickly investigate any alleged hazing and involve authorities if needed

While positive initiation traditions can help new members bond and build identity, it must be done safely. With awareness and prevention, tragic outcomes like serious injury or death can be avoided.

Get Legal Help for Hazing Accusations

Dealing with a criminal accusation under New York’s first-degree hazing law can be frightening and stressful. But an experienced criminal defense attorney can help protect your rights. They will thoroughly investigate the evidence against you, build the strongest defenses, and advocate for the best possible resolution to the case. If you or a loved one faces hazing charges, don’t hesitate to seek qualified legal counsel.