X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.


http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=48295

Judge Weinberg

DEFENDANT, CHARGED with second-degree aggravated harassment and fourth-degree stalking, moved for dismissal claiming, among other things, double jeopardy. He also sought preclusion of evidence of prior acts that were subject to a harassment prosecution in Kings County, which involved the same complainant and same time periods as the New York County prosecution. The court denied defendant’s motions in their entirety. It concluded that defendant was not being prosecuted twice for the same offense because, although the New York County charges covered the same time period and many of the same acts as the Kings County prosecution, they included two separate telephone calls to the complainant which were not included in the Kings County charges. The court also determined that double jeopardy would not preclude prosecution on the stalking charge because the stalking statutes are distinct from the harassment statutes and have different essential elements and public policy goals.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.