According to 7,149 conviction records, Endangering Welfare of a Child is reduced to a lesser charge in 77.6% of cases. The most common reduction is to Disorderly Conduct (42.7% of reductions). Reduction rates vary across 53 New York counties with sufficient data.

Charge reduction means the conviction charge differs from the original arrest charge, typically through plea negotiation. Percentages reflect the share of guilty outcomes where the conviction charge is a different category than the arrest charge. Data sourced from New York DCJS Pretrial Release Data. Last updated: March 2026

Charged with Endangering Welfare of a Child? An attorney can evaluate your case and negotiate the best possible outcome.

Talk to a New York Attorney — Free
77.6%
Reduction Rate
Disorderly Conduct
Most Common Target
7,149
Total Convictions

The 17 most common conviction charges when Endangering Welfare of a Child is reduced through a plea deal.

Conviction Charge Count % of Reductions
Disorderly Conduct 3,051 42.7%
Harassment 1,593 22.3%
Other 209 2.9%
Criminal Contempt 107 1.5%
Assault 94 1.3%
Petit Larceny 70 1.0%
Escape / Bail Jumping 65 0.9%
Criminal Trespass 61 0.9%
Official Misconduct 56 0.8%
DWI / DUI 53 0.7%
Drug Possession 50 0.7%
Traffic Offense 46 0.6%
Sex Offense 29 0.4%
Public Lewdness 24 0.3%
Weapons Offense 14 0.2%
Reckless Endangerment 14 0.2%
Strangulation 12 0.2%

Source: New York DCJS Pretrial Release Data (2019–2024) — NewYorkCourtFile.com

How often Endangering Welfare of a Child is reduced across New York counties. Click a county for detailed reduction targets.

County Convictions Reduced Reduction Rate Top Reduction
Queens 462 445 96.3% Disorderly Conduct
Suffolk 451 350 77.6% Disorderly Conduct
Oneida 365 289 79.2% Disorderly Conduct
Nassau 325 274 84.3% Disorderly Conduct
Erie 321 265 82.6% Harassment
Chautauqua 300 201 67.0% Disorderly Conduct
Westchester 298 265 88.9% Disorderly Conduct
Niagara 258 191 74.0% Harassment
Oswego 240 155 64.6% Disorderly Conduct
Onondaga 239 186 77.8% Harassment
Jefferson 216 175 81.0% Disorderly Conduct
Kings 178 159 89.3% Disorderly Conduct
Bronx 167 155 92.8% Disorderly Conduct
Albany 166 138 83.1% Disorderly Conduct
Schenectady 162 129 79.6% Disorderly Conduct
Monroe 159 137 86.2% Disorderly Conduct
Broome 157 111 70.7% Harassment
Montgomery 154 114 74.0% Disorderly Conduct
Cayuga 151 87 57.6% Harassment
Orange 139 127 91.4% Disorderly Conduct
Fulton 136 83 61.0% Harassment
New York 133 112 84.2% Disorderly Conduct
Steuben 116 83 71.6% Disorderly Conduct
Rensselaer 112 99 88.4% Disorderly Conduct
Ontario 111 74 66.7% Disorderly Conduct
Chemung 109 82 75.2% Harassment
Madison 106 80 75.5% Disorderly Conduct
Saratoga 105 82 78.1% Disorderly Conduct
Cortland 98 69 70.4% Harassment
Genesee 97 72 74.2% Disorderly Conduct
Cattaraugus 95 70 73.7% Disorderly Conduct
Dutchess 88 71 80.7% Disorderly Conduct
Warren 88 65 73.9% Disorderly Conduct
Clinton 75 42 56.0% Disorderly Conduct
Ulster 72 59 81.9% Harassment
Otsego 67 57 85.1% Disorderly Conduct
Chenango 59 31 52.5% Harassment
Herkimer 58 37 63.8% Disorderly Conduct
St. Lawrence 58 43 74.1% Harassment
Richmond 50 49 98.0% Disorderly Conduct
Columbia 36 29 80.6% Disorderly Conduct
Tompkins 36 20 55.6% Harassment
Wayne 34 26 76.5% Harassment
Seneca 32 19 59.4% Harassment
Washington 30 28 93.3% Disorderly Conduct
Franklin 28 10 35.7% Other
Rockland 26 26 100.0% Disorderly Conduct
Livingston 25 19 76.0% Harassment
Wyoming 23 11 47.8% Harassment
Orleans 22 18 81.8% Harassment
Essex 21 18 85.7% Harassment
Allegany 20 9 45.0% Disorderly Conduct
Tioga 19 13 68.4% Harassment

Source: New York DCJS Pretrial Release Data — NewYorkCourtFile.com

Plea bargaining is a central part of New York's criminal justice system. The vast majority of criminal cases are resolved through negotiated pleas rather than trial. Charge reductions — where a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offense — are one of the primary mechanisms. The data above reflects actual outcomes from DCJS Pretrial Release records, not predictions. Every case is unique, and outcomes depend on the specific facts, evidence, defense strategy, and local prosecutorial practices.

How we calculate reduction rates: We compare the arrest charge category to the conviction charge category for all guilty outcomes. When the conviction charge differs from the arrest charge, we count it as a reduction. Only charge category changes are counted — reductions within the same category (e.g., felony to misdemeanor assault) are not reflected here. Minimum threshold: 3 reductions per combination. Data from DCJS Pretrial Release Data, last updated March 2026.

Statistics from public court records for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. Past outcomes do not predict future results.

Endangering Welfare of a Child is reduced to a lesser charge in 77.6% of convictions statewide, based on 7,149 conviction records from DCJS Pretrial Release Data (2019–2024). This means that in roughly 78 out of every 100 convictions, the defendant pleads guilty to a different charge than originally arrested for.
The most common reduction for Endangering Welfare of a Child is to Disorderly Conduct, accounting for 42.7% of all reductions. This means when Endangering Welfare of a Child is reduced, it most often becomes a Disorderly Conduct conviction. The specific plea offered in your case depends on the facts, evidence, and your attorney's negotiations.
Yes. Endangering Welfare of a Child reduction rates vary significantly across New York's 62 counties. Counties like Queens (96.3% reduction rate) and Suffolk (77.6%) show different patterns. These differences reflect local prosecutorial practices, court caseloads, and plea bargaining customs. Consult a licensed attorney familiar with your county's courts.

Data source: New York DCJS Pretrial Release Data. 7,149 conviction records analyzed for Endangering Welfare of a Child. Last updated March 2026. — NewYorkCourtFile.com

Facing a Endangering Welfare of a Child charge? An attorney who handles these cases can walk you through your options.

Talk to a New York Attorney — Free Free · No obligation · Confidential