NY Lawmakers Approve Legislation to Curb Gravity Knife Prosecutions
The legislation is intended to eliminate the option for members of law enforcement to charge someone for simply carrying what could be considered a gravity knife under current state law, but is used commonly in a number of trades.
May 13, 2019 at 06:02 PM
6 minute read
The future of gravity knives in New York state will now be in the hands of Gov. Andrew Cuomo after state lawmakers gave final approval to a bill striking the weapon from a section of the state's penal code Monday.
The legislation is intended to eliminate the option for members of law enforcement to charge someone for simply carrying what could be considered a gravity knife under current state law but is used commonly in a number of trades.
The bill was approved unanimously Monday by the state Senate, where it's sponsored by Sen. Diane Savino, D-Staten Island.
“You can walk into any hardware store, you can buy one of these tools, but it is illegal to walk out of the door with it,” Savino said. “It makes absolutely no sense.”
Prosecutors and other members of law enforcement have been accused of using the law to target low-income people of color with jobs that require them to carry such a knife, which is identified by a so-called 'flick test.' That's when police flick their wrist while holding the knife to see if it opens without additional effort. But the test is subject to abuse, Savino said.
“You'd have the situation where you'd have someone stop someone and see [a knife] on their tool belt. Then the cops would try to flick test,” Savino said. “You can do it 10 or 20 times, and once you got it open, that's it—you're guilty and you get arrested.”
Her bill, which has already passed the Assembly, would remove gravity knives from sections of the state penal law that can be used to charge someone with possessing certain weapons. That way, prosecutors can't charge someone with carrying something that may meet the definition of a gravity knife under state law.
That definition was labeled by a federal judge as unconstitutionally vague in a decision nearly two months ago. Senior Judge Paul Crotty for the Southern District said the statute presented a “high risk of arbitrary enforcement,” partly because of the flick test Savino mentioned.
“Criminal culpability here is tied to a vague definition and functional test that could have outcomes depending on who is performing it and when,” Crotty wrote.
Assemblyman Dan Quart, D-Manhattan, sponsors the bill in the Assembly. He said their legislation compliments Crotty's decision because, rather than focusing on the definition of a gravity knife, they're trying to remove the option for members of law enforcement to charge someone for possessing the object. That means there won't be any more flick tests.
“The recent decision by Judge Crotty suggests the approach we took was the right one because [he] didn't focus on a definition, he focused on the flick test,” Quart said. “But he also focused on the ambiguity that any reasonable person walking down the street could not know whether he or she was carrying a lawful or unlawful work tool or not. So, by taking the two words out of the statute, we solve the problem Judge Crotty was concerned with, in my mind.”
The bill now heads to Cuomo, who vetoed a previous version of the legislation that attempted to address the matter in a different way.
That bill, also sponsored by Quart and Savino, would have changed the definition of a gravity knife in state law to avoid more prosecutions. Cuomo wrote at the time that the new definition would be more confusing for law enforcement, which could be counterproductive to the goal of the bill.
“Any person who goes into a store and purchases the product can be subsequently arrested and prosecuted for mere possession,” Cuomo said. “This construct is absurd and must be addressed, but this bill unfortunately does not address it.”
Savino said she expects Cuomo to sign the legislation, particularly because Crotty's decision affirmed what they've been arguing with the bill: that the current statute is not lawful and must be changed.
“We now have a definitive decision from federal court that says our statute is unconstitutional because of deliberate vagueness,” Savino said. “So we're taking it one step further than we have in previous sessions and taking the term out of the law.”
Actual gravity knives were developed and used during World War II by German forces to cut themselves loose from parachutes after landing. Those aren't the same weapons as today's knives, which are commonly used by people in several industries, like construction or even theater, Quart said.
“Those aren't being sold, or aren't in typical consumption in New York City and New York State and that's why we wrote it out and took the words 'gravity knife' out of the statute,” Quart said.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance has been a target of the legislation's supporters, who claim that his office exploited the current law in favor of prosecution. Savino said the statute has had long-felt consequences for people who didn't know they could spend time in jail for simply owning a tool for work.
“It had a real life implications for people being arrested. If you couldn't make bail you could be held in Rikers for the weekend, you could lose your job, you'd have to appear ic orut, you'd have to hire a lawyer, and for what?” Savino said. “Because you were in possession of something that New York state law said was legal to buy, but not legal to own.”
A spokesman for Cuomo said his office is reviewing the legislation but has not yet taken a position on the bill.
READ MORE:
Foes of 'Gravity Knife' Ban Ask for SCOTUS Review on Vagueness Grounds
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFederal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Plan Suit
4 minute readRelaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute readBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250