Stalking

Stalking is a persistent, obsessive, and unwanted behavior pattern where an individual repeatedly harasses, follows, or threatens another. These actions cause the victim profound fear and distress. This behavior can manifest in various forms. These include cyberstalking and online or physical intrusions. Stalking could involve individuals with previous or ongoing relationships or strangers.

Fresno prosecutors have adopted a proactive and assertive approach in stalking cases. This aggressive approach is informed by the substantial harm stalking inflicts on victims. Stalking violates the law and is a profoundly distressing and potentially hazardous experience for those targeted.

Stalking cases can be categorized as domestic violence crimes, especially when disgruntled former spouses or intimate partners are involved. However, they are not limited to these situations. They can also include offenders without a connection to the victim, particularly in cyberstalking cases.

The seriousness of stalking is reflected in the potential penalties. A conviction can lead to significant prison or jail time and substantial fines. Therefore, contact the California Criminal Lawyer Group immediately. We will mount a robust defense against the charges.

Stalking Under California Law

Penal Code 646.9 defines stalking as a pattern of behavior where an individual intentionally, maliciously, and persistently follows or harasses another person. These actions must result in the victim experiencing genuine fear for their own safety or the safety of their immediate family members for the accused to be found guilty.

Prosecutors can only secure a conviction if they prove elements specific to stalking. The must establish the following:

• You purposefully or willfully and with wrongful intent engaged in a consistent pattern of behavior.
• Your actions involved persistent, intentional acts of following, harassment, or threats against the victim — These actions should demonstrate a clear and continuous course of conduct directed at the victim.
• The victim genuinely experienced fear for their safety or the safety of their immediate family members as a direct result of your actions — This fear or distress must be based on your behavior and be reasonable under the circumstances.
• You made a credible threat against the victim — A credible threat is one that a reasonable person would believe could lead to harm or danger. It does not necessarily have to be an explicit threat. It can be implied or conveyed through your actions.
• You should have been aware that your actions would likely cause the victim to fear for their safety or that of their immediate family — This implies that you knew or should have known that your behavior would reasonably make the victim feel threatened or fear for his/her immediate family.

Note: Stalking involves a repeated pattern of behavior, not just a single isolated incident. The prosecution must demonstrate that you engaged in conduct characterized by repeated following, harassment, or threats over time. This conduct is referred to as the course of conduct. Importantly, the course of conduct must serve no legitimate purpose.

Let us look at the critical elements in detail.

• Willful, Malicious, and Repeated Action

Willful, malicious, and repeated actions describe a consistent pattern of behavior marked by deliberate, harmful, and persistent acts. These actions are carried out with the intent to cause harm, annoyance, or distress to another individual.

• Harassment

Harassment is the relentless and ongoing imposition of unwelcome and troubling conduct upon an individual. Individuals who harass others aim to inflict emotional or psychological distress, irritation, or discomfort. This behavior can manifest in several ways, including verbal abuse, threats, cyberbullying, stalking, or intrusive physical contact.

Harassment is perceived as a violation of an individual's boundaries.

• Credible Threat

A credible threat is a distinct category of threat. It has the potential to genuinely frighten the victim and cause them to fear for their safety or well-being.

Credible threats can be defined as threats that an ordinary person would perceive as grave, irrespective of whether the person issuing the threat intended to carry it out. People convey these threats through verbal communication, written correspondence, or electronically.

Credible threats are diverse. They include both explicit and direct statements. They can also be subtle, implied, or demonstrated through actions. The requirement is that all these avenues induce real fear in the recipient.

Subtle Threats

Examples of subtle threats include:

• A crafty language that hints at harm or repercussions, for example, saying, “It would be a shame if something befell your house.”
• Indirect remarks that imply negative outcomes, for example, “I guess some people are just lucky that accidents don't happen to them.”

Implied Threats

Implied threats could include:

• Language with conditions hinting at potential harm, for example, "If you do not comply, who knows what might happen?"
• Subtle cautions that harm could come to someone or their property, for instance, "Perhaps you should keep an eye out."

Threats Demonstrated Through Actions

Examples of threats that are evident from actions include the following:

1. Consistently tailing or surveilling someone, making them feel like they are under constant observation.
2. Vandalizing or harming someone's belongings to convey intimidation.
3. Physically confronting or intimidating someone in a manner that suggests potential harm.
4. Posting hurtful or threatening content online to intimidate or harass someone.

Determining whether a threat is credible usually hinges on proving two key factors:

1. The threat causes the target to reasonably fear for their safety or the safety of their immediate family.
2. The person making the threat appears capable of carrying it out.

These criteria are important in assessing whether a threat is credible and potentially subject to legal consequences.

• Reasonable Fear

Reasonable fear is considered rational or justified in a given situation, especially when evaluating an individual's reactions to a potential threat or danger. A victim’s response should align with an average, prudent person's feelings under similar circumstances. Only then will the prosecution prove that the victim’s fear was reasonable. It is the fear an ordinary person could experience when faced with the same facts or conditions.

However, the courts reserve this element for true threats when determining whether a threat is made with the intent to cause fear. True threats exclude:

• Joking expressions.
• Political statements that involve exaggeration, or
• Speech that is constitutionally protected.

• Immediate Family

"Immediate family" generally pertains to a person's nearest kin, encompassing:

• A husband or wife.
• Sons and daughters.
• Mother and father.
• Brothers and sister.

These individuals hold immediate family status due to their intimate blood or marital connections. Additionally, the immediate family also includes someone who regularly lives in the home.

Cyberstalking

Cyberstalking occurs within the digital space, predominantly employing electronic communication and online platforms. It entails the persistent and unwelcome pursuit, harassment, or intimidation of an individual through digital channels. Cyberstalkers commonly use various online tools, including social media, email, instant messaging, and other electronic communication methods, to engage in this behavior.

Typical cyberstalking actions include sending threatening or abusive messages, disseminating false information or rumors about the victim, hacking into the victim's online accounts or devices, assuming the victim's identity online, and employing technology to monitor the victim's activities and whereabouts.

Cyberstalking is a grave issue with potentially severe emotional, psychological, and even physical consequences for the victim.

Although Penal Code Section 646.9's language could appear tailored to in-person stalking, it extends its reach to cyberstalking. Any actions involving electronic methods to harass and instill fear in an individual that the victim reasonably fears for their safety or that of their immediate family will result in charges under the statute.

Crucially, you do not need to possess the intent to execute the threat. The pivotal consideration revolves around whether you had the capability or capacity to execute the threat, irrespective of your actual intent.

Legal Defenses You Can Raise in a Stalking Case

Individuals facing stalking accusations can assert legal defenses, much like in any other criminal case. Legal defense arguments put forth by defense attorneys aim to scrutinize the prosecution's case and safeguard the accused's rights.

In a stalking case, several common legal defenses apply:

• Lack of a Credible Threat

When you use the lack of a credible threat defense in your stalking case, you essentially argue that the threats you are accused of lacked credibility and did not genuinely frighten the victim. This defense is crafted to contest the prosecution's assertion that these threats met the legal criteria for establishing stalking.

If you can successfully show that these alleged threats lacked credibility and did not genuinely instill fear, you could have the opportunity to undermine the prosecution's case and achieve a favorable outcome for your situation.

Defense attorneys establish this defense by employing the following strategies:

1. Collecting evidence supporting the argument that the threats lacked credibility — This includes preserving text messages, emails, or other communications. These exchanges should demonstrate the alleged threats were not genuine or were taken out of context.
2. Presenting evidence that provides context for the alleged threats — This could include information about your relationship with the victim, prior interactions, or any circumstances shedding light on the nature of the statements you made.
3. If there were witnesses to your interactions with the alleged victim, their testimony could be pivotal. They could provide insights into the nature of your conversations or actions. Additionally, they could help determine whether they perceived any actual threat.
4. In certain situations, expert witnesses, for example, psychologists or threat assessment experts, can offer professional opinions. They can testify by analyzing the alleged threats, assessing their credibility and potential to cause fear.
5. Scrutinizing communication records to demonstrate that the alleged threats were inconsistent or not part of a consistent pattern of threatening behavior — Inconsistencies can undermine the credibility of threats.
6. Introducing character witnesses who can vouch for your non-threatening character and reputation. They can be valuable in illustrating that you pose no credible threat.
7. During the trial, attorneys will cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses to challenge the credibility and seriousness of the alleged threats.

• You Did Not Act Willfully or Maliciously

This defense strategy, not acting deliberately or maliciously, asserts that your actions were not planned or carried out with wrongful intent to either annoy or harm another person, a pivotal element required to establish a stalking offense.

You can substantiate a non-malicious purpose for your actions. For example, you could have legitimate reasons for finding yourself in the same vicinity as the alleged victim, attending shared events, or regularly visiting the same places.

Additionally, you can demonstrate that you lacked the intent to inflict harm. This can be achieved by highlighting the steps you took to prevent any confrontation or distress for the alleged victim. For example, you could have conscientiously maintained a respectful distance or promptly ceased contact upon their request. Alternatively, there is the possibility that an accidental encounter was misconstrued as stalking.

All these are ways to prove the lack of willful or malicious action.

• Lack of an Intent to Cause Fear

The lack of intent to cause fear defense arises when you argue that you never intended to instill fear in the victim. This defense directly challenges the prosecution's claim that you possessed the necessary intent to commit the crime.

Successfully proving this defense can significantly weaken the prosecution's case and potentially lead to a favorable outcome for you. You can use this defense successfully through the following strategies:

1. Thoroughly examining all communication between you and the alleged victim. Search for evidence demonstrating your intentions were not to cause fear but instead had a different purpose or context. For example, friendly or joking conversations you had with the alleged victim.
2. In some instances, expert witnesses, for example, psychologists or communication experts, can offer their professional opinions and testify to analyze the nature of your communication and assess your true intent.
3. Having character witnesses who can vouch for your non-threatening character and reputation can be crucial in illustrating that you lacked the intent to cause fear.

• Your Actions are Constitutionally Protected

Engaging in constitutionally protected activities is a valid argument in a stalking case. This defense asserts that you are not guilty of stalking because your actions align with constitutionally protected rights. Here are some examples of how this defense could apply:

Exercising Free Speech

If your actions, for example, sending messages or making statements to the alleged victim, were a form of free speech, you could argue that your conduct was not stalking. This defense can succeed if your communication falls within the boundaries of protected speech. This is the case even if the speech was unwanted or disturbing to the victim.

Legally Protesting

If you participated in a lawful protest, you could argue that your actions were constitutionally protected. Protesting is a fundamental right. If you legally conducted the demonstration, your actions can be considered a constitutionally protected activity.

Participating in an Assembly

Similarly, if you were involved in a peaceful assembly or gathering that was constitutionally protected, you could assert this defense. Gatherings are typically considered protected activities when conducted peacefully and within legal boundaries.

This defense's effectiveness hinges on the case's specific circumstances. It depends on the nature of your actions and whether they fall within the scope of constitutionally protected activities. The courts will assess whether your behavior falls under protected rights. Additionally, they consider whether your actions cross the line into stalking behavior.

• You Were Falsely Accused

False accusations in stalking cases are not uncommon, and they often emerge from emotionally charged situations between the accused and the alleged victim. These situations could include:

1. Spite or jealousy — Personal conflicts driven by spite or jealousy can lead to baseless stalking accusations, with one party seeking retribution against the other.
2. Breakups — After the termination of a romantic relationship, heightened emotions could prompt one party to falsely accuse the other of stalking out of anger or resentment.
3. Divorce proceedings — Stalking allegations can surface during or after divorce proceedings, especially if there are contentious disputes over assets, child custody, or other matters.
4. Child custody fights — Custody battles can escalate tensions, and in some cases, one party could employ stalking accusations as a strategic maneuver to gain the upper hand in these disputes.

If you face false stalking accusations, you can assert this as a defense. Essentially, your attorney will argue that the allegations lack credibility and are not rooted in truth. Instead, they result from misunderstandings, personal grudges, or ulterior motives.

Adverse Impact of Stalking Convictions for Non-Citizens

In immigration law, specific crime categories can lead to deportation or denial of entry for non-U.S. citizens. These categories include:

• Domestic violence crimes.
• Aggravated felonies.
• Crimes of moral turpitude.
• Controlled substance (drug) offenses.
• Firearms offenses, and

Felony stalking charges, under certain conditions, can potentially fall into the aggravated felony category. An aggravated felony conviction carries severe immigration consequences, for example, mandatory deportation.

Moreover, a stalking conviction can render a non-U.S. citizen inadmissible to the United States. This implies that individuals, including those with temporary visas like tourists or students, could face denial of entry or re-entry into the country if they possess a criminal record.

Impact of a Stalking Conviction on Gun Rights

A stalking conviction can profoundly impact your gun rights. Federal law and California law, PC 29800, impose restrictions on individuals with certain convictions, notably misdemeanor domestic violence crimes. These laws prevent these individuals from buying or possessing firearms.

Stalking is frequently categorized as domestic violence, particularly if it entails threatening or harassing actions within a domestic relationship.

Furthermore, individuals under restraining orders or protective orders linked to stalking allegations face firearm possession restrictions for the duration of the order. Violating these orders can result in additional legal repercussions.

Penalties If Convicted of Stalking

If convicted of the crime, you could face two penalties:

1. Criminal penalties, or
2. Civil penalties.

• Criminal Penalties

Stalking is a wobbler offense. You can either face misdemeanor or felony penalties upon conviction.

Misdemeanor violations are punishable by:

1. A jail sentence of up to one year.
2. A fine of up to $1,000 or both.
3. Summary or misdemeanor probation instead of jail time.

You will face felony charges if the following are true:

1. You have a prior stalking conviction — A prior conviction does not necessarily have to be for stalking the same victim in your present case.
2. The stalking charge resulted from a violation of a court-issued stay-away order.

Felony violations are punishable by:

1. Formal or felony probation.
2. Two, three, or five years in prison.
3. A fine of up to $1,000 or both.

• Civil Penalties

Beyond the criminal penalties, stalking victims can initiate a civil lawsuit against the alleged offender, seeking compensation for stalking-related damages. The victim must establish three fundamental elements in the suit:

Pattern of Conduct

The victim should prove that you, while acting as the stalker, engaged in a recurring series of actions deliberately intended to monitor, distress, or harass the victim.

The victim's testimony alone is insufficient. Independent evidence is essential to substantiate this assertion.

Fear for Safety

As a direct consequence of these actions, the victim had reasonable grounds to fear for their safety or the safety of an immediate family member.

Credible Threat or Restraining Order Violation

You must have either:

• Issued a credible threat against the victim's or their family member's safety and persisted in the harassing conduct despite being requested to desist, or
• You violated a restraining order through your behavior.

Should the alleged victim successfully establish these criteria, they could become eligible to recover two categories of damages:

• Compensatory damages — Designed to recompense the victim for losses and harm incurred due to the stalking, for example, therapy fees, emotional distress, medical expenses, and income losses
• Punitive damages — In select cases, courts could grant punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages. Their purpose is to penalize the offender for their egregious actions and act as a deterrent to others.

Note: Civil court proceedings operate independently from criminal cases, and the burden of proof in civil matters is generally lower than in criminal proceedings.

Find a Criminal Defense Attorney Near Me

Stalking charges are undoubtedly a grave matter. If you find yourself facing these allegations, seek legal counsel. A stalking conviction can carry severe repercussions, including criminal penalties, restraining orders, and, as previously noted, potential immigration or firearm ownership consequences.

Each stalking case is different, with outcomes hinged on the unique facts of the case and the available evidence. Given this complexity, the pivotal role of legal assistance cannot be overstated. That is why the Fresno attorneys at the California Criminal Lawyer Group work to safeguard your rights and develop a robust defense. Call us today at 559-712-8377 for assistance.