## Facts

- Theodore Johnson attacked his former girlfriend, Vanessa Parker, in Queens while she walked home with their three children (ages 12, 7, and an infant).
- Johnson struck Parker, knocked her into a fence, and toppled the baby carriage; the older children cried and observed the initial assault.
- Parker had an order of protection against Johnson arising from a prior incident; during the attack he yelled about her having put him in jail.
- Johnson dragged Parker to her apartment, forced entry, and threatened to leave her dead and make the children “motherless.”
- Inside the apartment, the children went to their bedroom while Johnson continued a violent episode lasting over 10 hours, beating Parker (including with a metal pipe) and throwing household objects, while the children could hear screams, yelling, and breaking glass.
- Parker eventually escaped and called police; only after Johnson’s arrest did the children leave their room, encountering broken glass and debris.
- While jailed awaiting trial, Johnson threatened to beat Parker if she did not drop the charges.

## Issues

1. Whether evidence was legally sufficient to support three convictions for endangering the welfare of a child under N.Y. Penal Law § 260.10(1) when Johnson’s violence was directed at the children’s mother, but occurred in the children’s presence or hearing and in their home.
2. Whether Johnson was entitled to reversal of his remaining convictions on his cross-appeal.

## Decision

- The New York Court of Appeals held the evidence legally sufficient to support the three child-endangerment convictions.
- The court ruled that § 260.10(1) is not limited to conduct directly aimed at a child and may be satisfied by exposing children to severe domestic violence likely to injure their physical, mental, or moral welfare.
- The court reversed the Appellate Division to the extent it had set aside the child-endangerment counts and reinstated those convictions.
- The court rejected Johnson’s cross-appeal and left intact the affirmance of the remaining convictions.

## Legal Principles

- Under N.Y. Penal Law § 260.10(1), the focus is whether a defendant knowingly acted in a manner likely to be injurious to a child’s physical, mental, or moral welfare, not whether the defendant’s conduct was directed at the child.
- A fact-finder may infer the “knowing” element where the circumstances make harm to children a likely consequence of the defendant’s conduct.
- Prolonged and violent domestic abuse occurring in the child’s home, within the child’s presence or hearing, can constitute conduct “likely to be injurious” to a child’s mental or moral welfare.

## Conclusion

The court reinstated three endangering-the-welfare-of-a-child convictions, holding that exposing children to an extended episode of severe domestic violence in their home may satisfy § 260.10(1) even when the children are not the direct targets, and it otherwise affirmed Johnson’s remaining convictions.


People v. Johnson, 95 N.Y.2d 368 (N.Y. 2000)