NY · jury_instructions
CJI2d[NY] Penal Law art 125, Transferred Intent
TRANSFERRED INTENT
NOTE: Several provisions of Penal Law §125.27(1) provide that a particular type of person must be the "intended victim" of the homicide or otherwise contain restrictions regarding the defendant's intent. In such situations, if the court determines that transferred intent applies to the charged crime and is in issue, it should provide a transferred intent charge. Such charge should make clear the statutory requirements which relate to the intended victim or the defendant's intent. The following serves as an example, which may be adapted according to the subdivision involved and the individual case.
INTENDED VICTIM IS POLICE OFFICER
[Penal Law §125.27(1)(a)(i)]
Under this count, the intended victim and the actual victim need not be the same person. In other words, it is not required that the person who died was the same person who was intended to be killed, provided that the intended victim was a police officer engaged in the course of performing his or her official duties and the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the intended victim was a police officer.
History
Caption: TRANSFERRED INTENT. Read from the committee's Word file. Prepared by the New York State Unified Court System Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions, Model Colloquies, and Evidence Rules; published by the Unified Court System at nycourts.gov (the internet edition is the only current and official publication of CJI2d).
Provenance
- Source
- nycourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-25
- Edition
- 2026-09-25
- Content hash
5e373e51f40a204323d07ee057cd03582cb8efed38059cd9f0ab2f5689f1670f
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.