Amends procedures required for the custodial interrogation of children to provide additional protections and for taking juveniles and sixteen and seventeen year olds into custody.
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A2620B
SPONSOR: Hevesi TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the family court act and the criminal procedure law, in
relation to the custodial interrogation of juveniles by law enforcement
PURPOSE:
This bill makes several changes to the Family Court Act to clarify and
protect the rights of children in the custody of law enforcement and
makes corresponding changes to the Criminal Procedure Law to address
children arrested as juvenile offenders and consult with an attorney
before they can be subjected to custodial interrogation by law enforce-
ment, thereby ensuring any waiver of rights under Miranda is genuinely
knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. The bill also requires a child
arrested without a warrant be brought directly to court, as opposed to
the police station, if a parent or legally responsible adult is not
expected to appear for them and they are not being questioned, unless
otherwise required under the Criminal Procedure Law.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
This bill makes several changes to the Family Court Act to clarify and
protect the rights of children in the custody of law enforcement and
makes corresponding changes to the Criminal Procedure Law to address
children arrested as juvenile offenders and consult with an attorney
before they can be subjected to custodial interrogation by law enforce-
ment, thereby ensuring any waiver of rights under Miranda is genuinely
knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. The bill also requires a child
arrested without a warrant be brought directly to court, as opposed to
the police station, if a parent or legally responsible adult is not
expected to appear for them and they are not being questioned, unless
otherwise required under the Criminal Procedure Law.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section one amends FCA § 305.2(3) to make clear that law enforcement's
obligation to "immediately" notify a parent. or person legally responsi-
ble (PLR) that their child has been taken into custody requires that
this notification take place before that child can be taken from the
location at which he or she was taken into custody to the police station
or any other location.
Section two amends FCA § 305.2(4) (a) to state that when law enforcement
has notified an arrested child's pare t or PLR' and reasonably believes
that the parent or PLR will appear for the child, law enforcement shall
take that child to his home, the station house, or another agreed upon
location to release him to his parent-or PLR.
Section three amends FCA S 305.2(4) (b) to state that when law enforce-
ment does not reasonably believe that an arrested child's parent or PLR
will appear for the child, law enforcement shall take that child to
family court or, if family court is not in session, to the designated
magistrate for the child's initial appearance under FCA § 307.4.
Section four amends FCA § 305.2(4) (c) to conform with other amended
subsections and Clarify that an arrested child shall only be taken to
detention if the officer did not release the child or bring the child to
family court or the designated magistrate.
Section five amends FCA § 305.2(5) to require that when a child has
allegedly committed a designated felony act and the family court is not
in session that law enforcement to take such youth to the most accessi-
ble magistrate to conduct a hearing under FCA section 307.4
Section six amends FCA § 305.2(5-a) to make technical changes.
Section seven amends and renumbers FCA § 305.2(6) which clarifies that
if an officer determines that questioning of a child necessary prior to
taking certain actions the officer may take the child to a facility
designated as suitable for questioning by the chief administrator of the
courts.
Section eight amends FCA § 305.2 (7) (8) to make clear that law enforce-
ment's obligation with respect to a child taken into custody as a person
in need of supervision to "immediately" notify a parent or person legal-
ly responsible that their child has been taken into custody requires
that this notification takes place before that child can be taken from
the location at which he or she was taken into custody to the police
station or any other location.
Section nine amends FCA § 724 (b) (c) to create separate paragraphs and
in paragraph (a) makes clear that law enforcement's obligation with
respect to a child taken into, custody as a juvenile offender or as a
person sixteen (or as of October 1, 2019, seventeen) to "immediately"
notify a parent or person legally responsible that their child has been
taken into custody requires that this notification takes place before
that child can be taken from the location at which he/she was taken into
custody to the police station or any other location.
Section ten amends CPL § 140.20(6) to create separate paragraphs and in
paragraph (a) makes clear that law enforcement's obligation with respect
to a child taken into custody as a juvenile offender or as a person
sixteen (or as of October 1, 2019, seventeen) to "immediately" notify a
parent or person legally responsible that their child has been taken
into custody requires that this notification takes place before that
child can be taken from the location at which he or she was taken into
custody to the police station or any other location.
Section 11 amends CPL § 140.27(5) to create separate paragraphs and in
paragraph (a) makes clear that law enforcement's obligation with respect
to a child taken into custody as a juvenile offender or as a person
sixteen (or as of October 1, 2019, seventeen) to "immediately" notify a
parent or person legally responsible that their child has been taken
into custody requires that this notification takes place before that
child can be taken from the location at which he or she was taken into
custody to the police station or any other location.
Section 12 establishes the effective date.
EXISTING LAW:
Existing law in New York State does not ensure that children under 18
years old - with all of their inherent developmental limitations - are
adequately and appropriately able to protect their right to remain
silent pursuant to the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The Family Court Act and the Criminal Procedure Law already require law
enforcement to "immediately" notify the parent or person legally respon-
sible of a child's arrest. The term "immediate," however, is undefined
under current law, and in practice, law enforcement regularly brings
arrested children to the police station house before notifying parents
or persons legally responsible The statutes also state that law enforce-
ment may only interrogate children when "necessary," but do not define
that crucial term. This ambiguity not only places vulnerable youth at
risk of being unreasonably interrogated, but it also forces law enforce-
ment to contend with uncertainty about what they are permitted to do
under the law and leaves the courts with little guidance when called
upon to interpret this requirement. Also, under current law, when the
police take a youth into custody and wish to interrogate that youth, the
police must advise the child of his/her right to remain silent and,
whenever possible, notify a parent or responsible adult to assist the
youth in deciding whether to waive this right. Family Court; Act §
305.2; Criminal Procedure Law § 140.20(6). This process does not prevent
youth from waiving their Miranda rights nor does it ensure that waiver
is knowing, voluntary and intelligent, as required by the Constitution.
JUSTIFICATION:
The bill makes three crucial changes to § 305.2 .of the Family Court Act
and to. § 140.20(6), 140.27(5) and 140.40(5) of the Criminal Procedure
Law. First, it clarifies that law enforcement cannot take a child to the
station house until they have notified a parent or person legally
responsible. Second, it requires that juveniles consult with counsel
before they can waive their rights under Miranda. The bill also makes
the first two changes to Family Court Act § 724.
Family Court Act §§ 305.2 and 724 and Criminal Procedure Law 140.20(6),
140.27(5) and 140.40(5) already require that law enforcement immediately
notify an arrested child's parent or legally responsible adult that the
child has been taken into custody; this proposal clarifies that immedi-
ate notification must take place before the officer takes the child to
another location. In an era in which all officers are equipped with
mobile phones, they are able to make contact with parents without first
taking children to the station house. In most cases, this will also mean
the officer will be able to make a more immediate determination whether
to bring the child to the station house, to the family court, or to
another location permitted by statute.
Under this proposal, unless questioning is necessary, after notifying a
parent, the officer may transport a child to his home, to another greed
upon location, or to the station house for purposes of releasing the
child to the parent with a desk appearance ticket under Family Court Act
§ 305.2 or after securing a written promise from the parent to bring the
child to the designated lead agency at specified time and place under
Family Court Act § 724. When the officer does not have reason to believe
that the parent will appear for the child, unless questioning is neces-
sary, the officer may bring the child straightaway to family court,
before a designated magistrate, to the designated lead agency, or to
another location specified in § 305.2(4) or § 724. Under the proposed
Criminal Procedure Law provisions, unless questioning is necessary,
after notifying the parent, the officer may release the youth with a
desk appearance ticket or bring the youth to the appropriate court or
otherwise proceed according to the provisions of the CPL.
This bill would also establish that under Family Court Act § 3052 and
Criminal Procedure Law § 140.20(6), 140.27(5) and 140.40(5), a child
suspect can only be questioned after consulting with an attorney by
phone, video, or in person. That consultation would be non-waivable, and
the taking of a statement without consultation with counsel, necessity,
or waiver of Miranda rights by a parent if present, would result in
suppression of the statement. Under Family Court Act § 724, a statement
would not be admissible into evidence at a fact-finding hearing since
the petitioner is usually a parent -and thus the child can never have
the advice and assistance of a parent who does not have a conflict of
interest. This treatment is comparable to those statements given to the
designated lead agency before fact finding. The decision to waive one's
constitutional right to be silent has enormous consequences, which is
why the law requires. that the decision be "knowing, voluntary, and
intelligent." See Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S.436 (1966). Because chil-
dren are fundamentally different from adults, different safeguards are
required in order for a child to make a knowing, voluntary, and intelli-
gent decision about a Miranda waiver.
The importance of additional Miranda protections for adolescents is
well-grounded in science. It is firmly established that brain develop-
ment continues into adulthood, and in recent years, the scientific
community has come to a resounding consensus that the prefrontal cortex
of the brain which largely governs decision-making, and judgment gener-
ally does not mature until well after the teenage years.* In fact, the
research demonstrates that the brain undergoes a "rewiring" process that
is not complete until approximately 25 years of age.** As a result,
youth are not yet able to consider the longterm consequences of their
actions or to resist environmental pressures as well as adults. The
ability to consider the consequences of one's actions and vulnerability
to environmental pressure are precisely the kinds of issues at play in a
custodial interrogation setting.*** Adolescents especially struggle to
process information and make sound decisions in stressful situations,
such as during interrogation.**** Additionally, research shows that
adolescents especially those in the justice system, who have high rates
of intellectual disability - often do not have the cognitive skills
necessary to understand the words or concepts in the Miranda warnings.
The consensus that adolescents' decision-making capabilities are not
fully developed and that, for this reason, young people require unique
legal protections has been recognized and embraced by the United States
Supreme Court. Children are, in the Court's words, "generally less
mature and responsible than adults;" "they often lack the experience,
perspective, and judgment to recognize and avoid choices that could be
detrimental to them"; and "they are more vulnerable or susceptible to
outside pressures than adults." J.D.B.V. North Carolina, 131 S.Ct.
2394, 2397 (2011) (internal quotations omitted). In addition, the
Supreme Court has recognized that children "have limited understandings
of the criminal justice system and the roles of the institutional actors
within it" Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 78 (2010). Addressing the
specific context of police interrogation, the Supreme Court has observed
that events that "would leave a man cold and unimpressed can overawe and
overwhelm a lad in his early teens." Haley v. Ohio, 332 U.S. 596,
599(1948). Finally, it has noted that "no matter how sophisticated, a
juvenile subject of police interrogation cannot be compared to an adult
subject" J.D.B., 131 S.Ct. at 2403 (internal quotations omitted).
In fact, leading professional organizations with expertise about chil-
dren agree that attorney consultation is needed during interrogation
because of children's developmental limitations. The American Psycholog-
ical Association, for example, "recommends that particularly vulnerable
suspect populations, including youth, persons with developmental disa-
bilities, and persons with mental illness, be provided special and
professional protection during interrogations such as being accompanied
and advised by an attorney or professional advocate."*****• The American
Academy on Child and Adolescent Psychiatry similarly believes that youth
should have an attorney present during questioning by police and that
"when interviewing juvenile suspects, polite should use terms and
concepts appropriate to the individual's developmental level. Any writ-
ten material should also be geared to the person's grade level and
cognitive capacity. In general, it is not sufficient to simply read or
recite information to a juvenile."****** Unfortunately, the presence of
a parent or responsible adult does not adequately ensure that a child
makes a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision with respect to his
or her Miranda rights.
Parents often have conflicting interests and often misunderstand the
proceedings. Because parents may teach their children to respect and
cooperate with law enforcement, they may find it difficult to advise a
child in custody not to cooperate. Similarly, parents teach their chil-
dren to tell the truth; but often a refusal to speak - even when the
child believes himself to be "innocent"- is in the youth's legal inter-
ests. Parents often find it hard to believe that their child could
possibly do whatever the child is accused of and therefore urge the
child to speak, not realizing that doing so may well undermine the
child's legal interests. Furthermore, when children are arrested, it
often occurs in the context of intra-familial disputes, discord, or
violence. Resulting conflicts of interest force parents to choose
between, on the one hand, giving the child in custody the best advice
and, on the other, looking out for the best interests of the other fami-
ly member involved, which is often the parent him/herself. All of these
issues are compounded when, as is often the case, the parent has been
summoned to the police station in the middle of the night, is feeling
humiliated, resentful, or even angry with the child, and is unable to
must er the kind of dispassionate and reflective thought process neces-
sary to best advise the child. Finally, often the parent or responsible
adult him/herself doesn't understand the meaning and nature of the
rights the youth is being asked to waive.
Social science research confirms that the existing parental notification
process to protect the rights of youth is inadequate. Research has
found that. when parents are present during interrogation, they almost
always either do not help their children make a decision or actually
encourage their children to waive their rights.******* Having a child
rely exclusively on the advice of an adult who may have conflicting
interests and who likely does not him/herself understand the meaning and
nature of the right at stake and the potential consequences of waiving
that right undermines the purpose of Family Court Act § 305 2 and Crimi-
nal Procedure Law §§ 140.20(6), 140.27(5) and 140.40(5).
Legal counsel would offer expert, objective advice to young people about
their Constitutional right to remain silent and their ability to waive
this right and speak to the police. Only with the benefit of such a
conflict-free consultation can children make any waiver of this bedrock
right knowingly,' voluntarily, and intelligently, in keeping with
requirements of the state and federal Constitutions. For this reason,
youth under 18 years of age facing custodial interrogation must be
required to consult with legal counsel to assist in their understanding
of their rights and the consequences of waiving those rights prior to
waiving their rights under Miranda.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2024A.8923A - 3rd Reading S.1099A - Referred to Finance
2023A.1963/Joyner -Referred to Ways and Means S.1099/Bailey -Referred to
Finance
2021-2021:A.5891C/Joyner- Passed Assembly S.2800C/Bailey- Referred to
Senate Finance
2019-2020:A.6982B/Joyner- Referred to Children and Families Committee
S.4980C/Bailey- Referred to Children and Families Committee
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Although the provision of counsel for consultation at interrogation will
inevitably impose a cost to the state and local jurisdictions, this bill
will also provide an important cost-saving benefit. Under current law,
juvenile defense attorneys and criminal defense attorneys often spend
significant amounts of time litigating the legality of their clients'
interrogation by law enforcement in what are known as Huntley hearings.
These hearings can require several lengthy court appearances, consuming
significant resources of defense attorneys, prosecutors, law enforcement
witnesses, and judges. If this bill becomes law, it will eliminate the
need for a Huntley hearing in the vast majority of cases, significantly
reducing the strain on the many agencies and individuals involved.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect one hundred and 80 days after it shall have
become a law. * Linda B. Chamberlain, The Amazing Teen Brain: What
Every Child Advocate Needs to Know, 28 A.B.A. CHILD. L. PRAC. No. 2 at
17-18 (April 2009).
** M. Arain•et al., Maturation of the Adolescent Brain, 9
NEUROPSY-CHIATR.DIS.TREAT.449-461(2013),available at
https:/www.ncblnlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC3621648/, citing L. Gavin et
al., Sexual and Reproductive Health of persons aged 10-24 years United
States, 2002-2007, 58(6) MMWR SURVEILL. SUMM. 1-58 (2009).
*** See Gold-stein et al., Waving Good-bye to Waiver: A Developmental
Argument Against Youths' Waiver of Miranda Rights, Legislation and
Public Policy, vol. 21 (2018); Elizabeth Cauffman & Laurence Steinberg,
Emerging Findings from Research on Adolescent Development and Juvenile
Justice, 7 Victims and Offenders 428, 433 (2012); Laurence Steinberg,
Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice, 5 Ann. Re .Clinical
Psychol. 459, 65-71 (2009); Laurence. Steinberg, The Science of Adoles-
cent Brain Development and Its Implication for Adolescent Rights and
Responsibilities, in Human Rights and Adolescence 59, 64 (Jacqueline
Bhabha. ed., 2014); Dustin Albert & Laurence Steinberg, Judgment and
Decision-Making in Adolescence, 21 J. Res. Adolescence 211(2011); Linda
Van Leijenhorst et al, Adolescent
Risky Decision-Making: Neurocognitive Development of Reward and Control
Regions, 51 Neuroimage 345; 353-54 (2010). Sarah-Jayne Blakemore &
Trevor W. Robbins, Decision-Making in the Adolescent Brain, 15 Nature
Neuroscience 1184, 1186 (2012). **** See Goldstein et al., supra.
***** Resolution on Interrogations of Criminal Suspects, Am.
Psychol.Ass'n (2014),
http://www.apa.org/about/policy/interrogations.aspx.Interviewing and
Interrogating Juvenile
Suspects,Am.Acad.Child&AdolescentPsychiatry(Mar.7, 2013),
https://wwvv.aacap.org/aacapipolicy_statements/2013/ Intervievving
and_Interrogating Juvenile-Suspects. aspx.
******* Jodi L. Viljoen et al., Legal Decisions of Preadolescent and
Adolescent Defendants: Predictors of Confessions, Pleas,
their Parents' Conceptual & Practical Knowledge of Police Interrogation:
A Family Dyad Approach, 37 J. Youth & Adolescence 685, 690-94(2008).
STATE OF NEW YORK
________________________________________________________________________
2620--B
Cal. No. 97
2025-2026 Regular Sessions
IN ASSEMBLY
January 21, 2025
___________
Introduced by M. of A. HEVESI, CLARK, RAGA, SIMON, KELLES, DINOWITZ,
ROSENTHAL, ZACCARO, R. CARROLL, LAVINE, GLICK, GONZALEZ-ROJAS, BRON-
SON, CUNNINGHAM, MEEKS, ALVAREZ, PAULIN, DE LOS SANTOS, BORES, SIMONE,
GALLAGHER, WALKER, GIBBS, LUNSFORD, TAPIA, WOERNER, BICHOTTE HERMELYN,
CRUZ, SHRESTHA, SEAWRIGHT, DAVILA, HYNDMAN, STECK, ZINERMAN,
O'PHARROW, SCHIAVONI, LEVENBERG, P. CARROLL, TAYLOR, BURDICK, WEPRIN,
OTIS, FORREST, VANEL, LUPARDO, REYES, SEPTIMO, MITAYNES, BURROUGHS,
SOLAGES, DAIS, SHIMSKY, ANDERSON, KIM, VALDEZ, McMAHON, LASHER, DILAN,
WRIGHT -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. COOK -- read once and
referred to the Committee on Children and Families -- reported and
referred to the Committee on Codes -- reported and referred to the
Committee on Ways and Means -- committee discharged, bill amended,
ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee --
ordered to a third reading, amended and ordered reprinted, retaining
its place on the order of third reading
AN ACT to amend the family court act and the criminal procedure law, in
relation to the custodial interrogation of juveniles by law enforce-
ment
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem-bly, do enact as follows:
1 Section 1. Subdivision 3 of section 305.2 of the family court act, as
2 added by chapter 920 of the laws of 1982, is amended to read as follows:
3 3. If an officer takes such child into custody or if a child is deliv-
4 ered to [him] an officer under section 305.1, [he] the officer shall
5 immediately, before transporting the child to the police station house,
6 make every reasonable effort to notify the parent or other person legal-
7 ly responsible for the child's care, or if such legally responsible
8 person is unavailable the person with whom the child resides, that the
9 child has been taken into custody.
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[] is old law to be omitted.
LBD02102-06-6
A. 2620--B 2
1 § 2. Paragraph (a) of subdivision 4 of section 305.2 of the family
2 court act, as added by chapter 920 of the laws of 1982, is amended to
3 read as follows:
4 (a) when the officer reasonably believes such parent or other person
5 legally responsible for the child's care will appear, take the child to
6 the child's home, the station house, or another location agreed upon
7 with the parent or person legally responsible, and release the child to
8 the custody of [his parents or other person legally responsible for his
9 care] such person upon the issuance in accordance with section 307.1 of
10 a family court appearance ticket to the child and the person to whose
11 custody the child is released; or
12 § 3. Paragraph (b) of subdivision 4 of section 305.2 of the family
13 court act, as amended by section 63 of part WWW of chapter 59 of the
14 laws of 2017, is amended to read as follows:
15 (b) when the officer does not reasonably believe the parent or other
16 person legally responsible for the child's care will appear for the
17 child, forthwith and with all reasonable speed take the child directly,
18 and without [his] the child first being taken to the police station
19 house, to the family court located in the county in which the act occa-
20 sioning the taking into custody allegedly was committed, or, when the
21 family court is not in session, to the most accessible magistrate, if
22 any, designated by the appellate division of the supreme court in the
23 applicable department to conduct a hearing under section 307.4 [of this
24 part, unless the officer determines that it is necessary to question the
25 child, in which case he or she may take the child to a facility desig-
26 nated by the chief administrator of the courts as a suitable place for
27 the questioning of children or, upon the consent of a parent or other
28 person legally responsible for the care of the child, to the child's
29 residence and there question him or her for a reasonable period of
30 time]; or
31 § 4. Paragraph (c) of subdivision 4 of section 305.2 of the family
32 court act, as amended by section 3 of part G of chapter 58 of the laws
33 of 2010, is amended to read as follows:
34 (c) when the officer does not release the child pursuant to paragraph
35 (a) of this subdivision, or take the child to family court or to a
36 magistrate pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subdivision, take the child
37 to a place certified by the office of children and family services as a
38 juvenile detention facility for the reception of children; or
39 § 5. Subdivision 5 of section 305.2 of the family court act, as
40 amended by chapter 398 of the laws of 1983, is amended to read as
41 follows:
42 5. If such child has allegedly committed a designated felony act as
43 defined in subdivision eight of section 301.2, and the family court in
44 the county is in session, the officer shall forthwith take the child
45 directly to such family court[, unless the officer takes the child to a
46 facility for questioning in accordance with paragraph (b) of subdivision
47 four. If such child has not allegedly committed a designated felony act
48 and such family court is in session, the officer shall either forthwith
49 take the child directly to such family court, unless the officer takes
50 the child to a facility for questioning in accordance with paragraph (b)
51 of subdivision four or release the child in accordance with paragraph
52 (a) of subdivision four] or, when the family court is not in session, to
53 the most accessible magistrate, if any, designated by the appellate
54 division of the supreme court in the applicable department to conduct a
55 hearing under section 307.4.
A. 2620--B 3
1 § 6. Subdivision 5-a of section 305.2 of the family court act, as
2 added by chapter 299 of the laws of 2020, is amended to read as follows:
3 5-a. Where a child is subject to interrogation at a facility desig-
4 nated by the chief administrator of the courts as a suitable place for
5 the questioning of juveniles pursuant to subdivision [four] seven of
6 this section, the entire interrogation, including the giving of any
7 required notice to the child as to [his or her] their rights and the
8 child's waiver of any rights, shall be video recorded in a manner
9 consistent with standards established by rule of the division of crimi-
10 nal justice services pursuant to paragraph (e) of subdivision three of
11 section 60.45 of the criminal procedure law. The interrogation shall be
12 recorded in a manner such that the persons in the recording are iden-
13 tifiable and the speech is intelligible. A copy of the recording shall
14 be subject to discovery pursuant to section 331.2 of this article.
15 § 7. Subdivision 6 of section 305.2 of the family court act, as added
16 by chapter 920 of the laws of 1982, is amended to read as follows:
17 6. [In all other cases] If such child has not allegedly committed a
18 designated felony act, and in the absence of special circumstances, the
19 officer shall release the child in accordance with paragraph (a) of
20 subdivision four.
21 § 8. Subdivisions 7 and 8 of section 305.2 of the family court act,
22 subdivision 7 as amended by chapter 398 of the laws of 1983 and subdivi-
23 sion 8 as amended by chapter 299 of the laws of 2020, are amended and a
24 new subdivision 10 is added to read as follows:
25 7. If the officer determines that questioning of the child is neces-
26 sary prior to taking action authorized by subdivision four or five, the
27 officer may take the child to a facility designated by the chief admin-
28 istrator of the courts as a suitable place for the questioning of chil-
29 dren or, upon the consent of a parent or other person legally responsi-
30 ble for the care of the child, to the child's residence and there,
31 subject to the requirements of subdivision eight, question the child for
32 a reasonable period of time.
33 8. A child shall not be questioned pursuant to this section unless
34 [he] or until:
35 (a) the child and a person required to be notified pursuant to subdi-
36 vision three if present, have been advised:
37 [(a)] (i) of the child's right to remain silent;
38 [(b)] (ii) that the statements made by the child may be used in a
39 court of law;
40 [(c)] (iii) of the child's right to have an attorney present at such
41 questioning; and
42 [(d)] (iv) of the child's right to have an attorney provided for [him]
43 them without charge if [he is] they are indigent; and
44 (b) the child has consulted with legal counsel in person, by tele-
45 phone, or by video conference. This consultation may not be waived.
46 [8.] 9. In determining the suitability of questioning and determining
47 the reasonable period of time for questioning such a child, the child's
48 age, the presence or absence of [his or her] the child's parents or
49 other persons legally responsible for [his or her] the child's care,
50 notification pursuant to subdivision three and, where the child has been
51 interrogated at a facility designated by the chief administrator of the
52 courts as a suitable place for the questioning of juveniles, whether the
53 interrogation was in compliance with the video-recording and disclosure
54 requirements of subdivision five-a of this section shall be included
55 among relevant considerations.
A. 2620--B 4
1 10. In addition to statements that must be suppressed as involuntarily
2 made within the definition in subdivision two of section 344.2, a state-
3 ment shall be suppressed: when the child has not consulted with legal
4 counsel as required by paragraph (b) of subdivision eight; or when a
5 person notified pursuant to subdivision three, if present, has not been
6 advised of and voluntarily waived the rights delineated in paragraph (a)
7 of subdivision eight.
8 § 9. Section 724 of the family court act, the section heading and
9 subdivisions (b) and (c) as amended by chapter 843 of the laws of 1980,
10 subdivision (a) as amended by chapter 920 of the laws of 1982, para-
11 graphs (i) and (ii) as amended and paragraph (iv) of subdivision (b) as
12 added by section 4 of part E of chapter 57 of the laws of 2005, para-
13 graph (iii) of subdivision (b) as amended by section 7 of part M of
14 chapter 56 of the laws of 2017, and subdivision (d) as added by chapter
15 809 of the laws of 1963, is amended to read as follows:
16 § 724. Duties of police officer or peace officer after taking into
17 custody or on delivery by private person. (a) If a peace officer or a
18 police officer takes into custody or if a person is delivered to [him]
19 the officer under section seven hundred twenty-three, the officer shall
20 immediately, before transporting the child to any other location, make
21 every reasonable effort to notify the parent or other person legally
22 responsible for [his] the person's care, or the person with whom [he]
23 the person is domiciled, that [he] the person has been taken into custo-
24 dy.
25 (b) After making every reasonable effort to give notice under [para-
26 graph] subdivision (a) of this section, the officer shall
27 (i) when the officer reasonably believes such parent or other person
28 legally responsible for the child's care will appear, take the child to
29 the child's home, the police station house, or another location agreed
30 upon with the parent or person legally responsible, and release the
31 youth to the custody of [his or her parent or other] such person [legal-
32 ly responsible for his or her care] upon the written promise, without
33 security, of the person to whose custody the youth is released that [he
34 or she] such person will produce the youth before the lead agency desig-
35 nated pursuant to section seven hundred thirty-five of this article in
36 that county at a time and place specified in writing; or
37 (ii) when the officer does not reasonably believe such parent or other
38 person legally responsible for the child's care will appear for the
39 child, forthwith and with all reasonable speed take the youth directly,
40 and without first being taken to the police station house, to the desig-
41 nated lead agency located in the county in which the act occasioning the
42 taking into custody allegedly was done[, unless the officer determines
43 that it is necessary to question the youth, in which case he or she may
44 take the youth to a facility designated by the chief administrator of
45 the courts as a suitable place for the questioning of youth or, upon the
46 consent of a parent or other person legally responsible for the care of
47 the youth, to the youth's residence and there question him or her for a
48 reasonable period of time]; or
49 (iii) take a youth in need of crisis intervention or respite services
50 to a runaway and homeless youth crisis services program or other
51 approved respite or crisis program; or
52 (iv) take the youth directly to the family court located in the county
53 in which the act occasioning the taking into custody was allegedly done,
54 provided that the officer affirms on the record that [he or she] the
55 officer attempted to exercise the options identified in paragraphs (i),
A. 2620--B 5
1 (ii) and (iii) of this subdivision, was unable to exercise these
2 options, and the reasons therefor.
3 (c) In the absence of special circumstances, the officer shall release
4 the child in accord with paragraph [(b)] (i) of subdivision (b) of this
5 section.
6 (d) If the officer determines that questioning of the child is neces-
7 sary prior to taking action authorized by subdivision (b) of this
8 section, the officer may take the child to a facility designated by the
9 chief administrator of the courts as a suitable place for the question-
10 ing of children or, upon the consent of a parent or other person legally
11 responsible for the care of the child, to the child's residence and
12 there, subject to the requirements of subdivision (e) of this section,
13 question the child for a reasonable period of time.
14 (e) In determining the suitability of questioning and determining what
15 is a "reasonable period of time" for questioning a child, the child's
16 age [and], the presence or absence of [his] the child's parents or other
17 person legally responsible for [his] the child's care and notification
18 pursuant to subdivision (a) of this section shall be included among the
19 relevant considerations.
20 (f) No statement made to a peace officer or a police officer prior to
21 the commencement of a fact-finding hearing may be admitted into evidence
22 at a fact-finding hearing.
23 § 10. Subdivision 6 of section 140.20 of the criminal procedure law,
24 as amended by section 20 of part WWW of chapter 59 of the laws of 2017,
25 is amended to read as follows:
26 6. (a) Upon arresting a juvenile offender or a person sixteen or
27 [commencing October first, two thousand nineteen,] seventeen years of
28 age without a warrant, the police officer shall immediately, before
29 transporting the child to the police station house, make every reason-
30 able effort to notify the parent or other person legally responsible for
31 [his or her] the child's care or the person with whom [he or she] the
32 child is domiciled, that such juvenile offender or [person] sixteen or
33 seventeen year old has been arrested, and the location of the facility
34 where [he or she is being] the child will be detained.
35 (b) If the officer determines that it is necessary to question a juve-
36 nile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old, the offi-
37 cer must take [him or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen
38 year old to a facility designated by the chief administrator of the
39 courts as a suitable place for the questioning of children or, upon the
40 consent of a parent or other person legally responsible for the care of
41 the juvenile or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old, to [his or
42 her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's residence
43 and there, subject to the requirements of paragraph (c) of this subdivi-
44 sion, question [him or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
45 teen year old for a reasonable period of time.
46 (c) A juvenile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old
47 shall not be questioned pursuant to this section unless [he or she] or
48 until:
49 (i) the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old and a
50 person required to be notified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdi-
51 vision, if present, have been advised:
52 [(a)] (A) of the juvenile offender's or [such person's] sixteen or
53 seventeen year old's right to remain silent;
54 [(b)] (B) that the statements made by [him or her] the juvenile offen-
55 der or sixteen or seventeen year old may be used in a court of law;
A. 2620--B 6
1 [(c)] (C) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
2 teen year old's right to have an attorney present at such questioning;
3 and
4 [(d)] (D) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
5 teen year old's right to have an attorney provided for [him or her] them
6 without charge if [he or she is] they are unable to afford counsel[.];
7 (ii) the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old has
8 consulted with an attorney in person, by telephone, or by video confer-
9 ence. This consultation may not be waived.
10 (d) In determining the suitability of questioning and determining the
11 reasonable period of time for questioning such a juvenile offender or
12 [person] sixteen or seventeen year old, [his or her] the juvenile offen-
13 der or sixteen or seventeen year old's age, the presence or absence of
14 [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's
15 parents or other persons legally responsible for [his or her] the juve-
16 nile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's care and notification
17 pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdivision shall be included among
18 relevant considerations.
19 (e) In addition to statements that must be suppressed as involuntarily
20 made within the definition in subdivision two of section 60.45 of this
21 chapter, a statement shall be suppressed: when the child has not
22 consulted with an attorney as required by paragraph (c) of this subdivi-
23 sion; or when a person notified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdi-
24 vision, if present, has not been advised of and voluntarily waived the
25 rights delineated in paragraph (c) of this subdivision.
26 § 11. Subdivision 5 of section 140.27 of the criminal procedure law,
27 as amended by section 23 of part WWW of chapter 59 of the laws of 2017,
28 is amended to read as follows:
29 5. (a) Upon arresting a juvenile offender or a person sixteen or
30 [commencing October first, two thousand nineteen,] seventeen years of
31 age without a warrant, the peace officer shall immediately, before
32 transporting the child to the police station house, make every reason-
33 able effort to notify the parent or other person legally responsible for
34 [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's
35 care or the person with whom [he or she] the juvenile offender or
36 sixteen or seventeen year old is domiciled, that such juvenile offender
37 or [person] sixteen or seventeen year old has been arrested, and the
38 location of the facility where [he or she is being] the juvenile offen-
39 der or sixteen or seventeen year old will be detained.
40 (b) If the officer determines that it is necessary to question a juve-
41 nile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old, the offi-
42 cer must take [him or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen
43 year old to a facility designated by the chief administrator of the
44 courts as a suitable place for the questioning of children or, upon the
45 consent of a parent or other person legally responsible for the care of
46 a juvenile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old, to
47 [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's
48 residence and there, subject to the requirements of paragraph (c) of
49 this subdivision, question [him or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen
50 or seventeen year old for a reasonable period of time.
51 (c) A juvenile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old
52 shall not be questioned pursuant to this section unless or until:
53 (i) the juvenile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year
54 old and a person required to be notified pursuant to paragraph (a) of
55 this subdivision, if present, have been advised:
A. 2620--B 7
1 [(a)] (A) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
2 teen year old's right to remain silent;
3 [(b)] (B) that the statements made by the juvenile offender or [such
4 person] sixteen or seventeen year old may be used in a court of law;
5 [(c)] (C) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
6 teen year old's right to have an attorney present at such questioning;
7 and
8 [(d)] (D) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
9 teen year old's right to have an attorney provided for [him or her] the
10 juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old without charge if [he
11 or she] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old is
12 unable to afford counsel[.]; and
13 (ii) the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old has
14 consulted with an attorney in person, by telephone or by video confer-
15 ence. This consultation may not be waived.
16 (d) In determining the suitability of questioning and determining the
17 reasonable period of time for questioning such a juvenile offender or
18 [such person his or her] sixteen or seventeen year old, the juvenile
19 offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's age, the presence or absence
20 of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's
21 parents or other persons legally responsible for [his or her] the juve-
22 nile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's care and notification
23 pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdivision shall be included among
24 relevant considerations.
25 (e) In addition to statements that must be suppressed as involuntarily
26 made within the definition in subdivision two of section 60.45 of this
27 chapter, a statement shall be suppressed: when the child has not
28 consulted with an attorney as required by paragraph (c) of this subdivi-
29 sion; or when a person notified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdi-
30 vision, if present, has not been advised of and voluntarily waived the
31 rights delineated in paragraph (c) of this subdivision.
32 § 12. Subdivision 5 of section 140.40 of the criminal procedure law,
33 as amended by section 24 of part WWW of chapter 59 of the laws of 2017,
34 is amended to read as follows:
35 5. (a) If a police officer takes an arrested juvenile offender or a
36 person sixteen or [commencing October first, two thousand nineteen,]
37 seventeen years of age into custody, the police officer shall immediate-
38 ly, before transporting the child to the police station house, make
39 every reasonable effort to notify the parent or other person legally
40 responsible for [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
41 teen year old's care or the person with whom [he or she] the juvenile
42 offender or sixteen or seventeen year old is domiciled, that such juve-
43 nile offender or [person] sixteen or seventeen year old has been
44 arrested, and the location of the facility where [he or she is being]
45 the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old will be detained.
46 (b) If the officer determines that it is necessary to question a juve-
47 nile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old the officer
48 must take [him or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen
49 year old to a facility designated by the chief administrator of the
50 courts as a suitable place for the questioning of children or, upon the
51 consent of a parent or other person legally responsible for the care of
52 the juvenile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old, to
53 [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's
54 residence and there, subject to the requirements of paragraph (c) of
55 this subdivision, question [him or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen
56 or seventeen year old for a reasonable period of time.
A. 2620--B 8
1 (c) A juvenile offender or [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old
2 shall not be questioned pursuant to this section unless [he or she] or
3 until:
4 (i) the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old and a
5 person required to be notified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdi-
6 vision, if present, have been advised:
7 [(a)] (A) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
8 teen year old's right to remain silent;
9 [(b)] (B) that the statements made by the juvenile offender or [such
10 person] sixteen or seventeen year old may be used in a court of law;
11 [(c)] (C) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
12 teen year old's right to have an attorney present at such questioning;
13 and
14 [(d)] (D) of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seven-
15 teen year old's right to have an attorney provided for [him or her] them
16 without charge if [he or she is] they are unable to afford counsel[.];
17 and
18 (ii) the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old has
19 consulted with an attorney in person, by telephone, or by video confer-
20 ence. This consultation may not be waived.
21 (d) In determining the suitability of questioning and determining the
22 reasonable period of time for questioning such a juvenile offender or
23 [such person] sixteen or seventeen year old, [his or her] the juvenile
24 offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's age, the presence or absence
25 of [his or her] the juvenile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's
26 parents or other persons legally responsible for [his or her] the juve-
27 nile offender or sixteen or seventeen year old's care and notification
28 pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdivision shall be included among
29 relevant considerations.
30 (e) In addition to statements that must be suppressed as involuntarily
31 made within the definition in subdivision two of section 60.45 of this
32 chapter, a statement shall be suppressed: when the child has not
33 consulted with an attorney as required by paragraph (c) of this subdivi-
34 sion; or when a person notified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdi-
35 vision, if present, has not been advised of and voluntarily waived the
36 rights delineated in paragraph (c) of this subdivision.
37 § 13. This act shall take effect on the one hundred eightieth day
38 after it shall have become a law.
