Case Summaries: Stalking - Mental Distress Requirements
Strausser v. White
2009-Ohio-3597 (8th Dist., Cuyahoga, 7/23/09) (evidence was sufficient to show that a postal customer on the postal carrier’s mail route knowingly engaged in a pattern of conduct that caused the carrier mental distress, as required to support the issuance of a civil stalking protection order, where the customer got angry with carrier when she refused to talk to him and began to harass her, obtaining her home address, personally delivering two letters to her without stamps on them, calling her employer to complain about her, going out on the street and approaching her, losing his temper with her, yelling at her from his yard, and threatening to make her "pay," causing her to have anxiety attacks, chest pains, sleepless nights, and seek help from a psychologist).
Date: 3/19/2010
Gruber v. Hart
Gruber v. Hart, 2007-Ohio-873 (6th App. Dist., Ottawa, 3/2/2007) (pattern of conduct required for issuance of SCPO need not cause actual mental distress; only need prove that stalker caused victim to believe that he would cause the victim mental distress or physical harm).
Keywords: "stalking civil protection order" "burden of proof" "civil stalking protection order" "CSPO"
Date: 5/30/2008
Jenkins v. Jenkins
Jenkins v. Jenkins, 2007-Ohio-422 (10th Dist., Franklin, 2/1/2007) (Judgment granting stalking CPO affirmed because a showing of actual mental distress is not requiredsee Dayton v. Davis (1999), 136 Ohio App.3d 26, 32; it was only necessary to establish that respondent knowingly caused petitioner to believe he would cause her mental distress.).
Keywords: 2903.211 "civil protection order"
Date: 4/2/2007
State v. Bone
State v. Bone, 2006-Ohio-3809 (10th Dist., Franklin, 7/25/2006) (Menacing by stalking conviction affirmed because State is not required to prove that defendant actually suffered mental distress or physical harm; need only prove that defendant, by a pattern of conduct, caused victim to believe that he would cause her mental distress or physical harm.).
Keywords: 2903.211
Date: 4/2/2007
Noah v. Brillhart
No. 02CA0050 (Wayne, 9th Dist., 5/14/03) Menacing by stalking conviction affirmed because petitioners "mental distress" was evidenced by her change of routine and pattern of activities, fear of visiting friends at night, and request of a deputy escort to her daytime meetings.
Keywords:
Date: 1/12/2004
Bach v. Crawford
2003 WL 1193783 (2nd Dist., 2003). (Appellate court affirmed trial courts overruling of a magistrates decision granting a domestic violence civil protection order based on menacing by stalking. A perpetrator must knowingly engage in a pattern of conduct that causes another to believe that the offender would cause physical harm to the other person or cause mental distress to the other person. There was insufficient evidence of mental distress because there was no physical violence or threatening conduct. The only possible evidence of threatened physical violence in this case was the alleged perpetrators' reference to Lorena Bobbitt made prior to the end of the alleged perpetrators and alleged victims romantic relationship. Furthermore, there was insufficient evidence to prove that the complaining victim ever believed the perpetrator would cause him physical harm, given his recent attendance at a party very near her house and his failure to call the police to protect himself.)
Keywords: 2903.211, reasonable fear
Date: 5/15/2003
Striff v. Striff
2003 WL 397869 (2/21/2003). (Finding sufficient evidence to extend a stalking civil protection order even though there had been no physical altercations between the parties since the first institution of the stalking civil protection order.)
Keywords: 2903.211, reasonable fear
Date: 5/15/2003
Wallace v. Masten
2003 WL 927600 (4th Dist., 2/11/2003). (The appellate court affirmed the trial courts grant of a stalking civil protection order and specifically noted that explicit threats were not necessary to prove the essential elements of menacing by stalking under Ohio law. Although the court declined to rule on the constitutionality of a limitation on an individuals right to possess firearms once a violation of R.C. 2903.211 was proven, the court did find there was insufficient evidence to support the gun prohibition in this civil protection order, given that the stalker had never approached his victim with a firearm.)
Keywords: 2903.214, reasonable fear, mental distress
Date: 5/15/2003
Coleridge v. Tomsho
2003 WL 294356 (5th Dist., 2/10/2003). (The 5th District Appellate Court found that there was sufficient evidence to justify a civil stalking protection order even though the petitioners boyfriend had never threatened her. The supporting evidence included testimony from the petitioner that her former boyfriend stalked her for more than a year. The court ruled that verbal threats were not a necessary element of establishing a fear that someone would cause physical harm or mental distress; rather, the trier of fact could infer that someone intended such a threat through his actions.)
Keywords: 2903.214, reasonable fear
Date: 5/15/2003
Bright v. Lane
2003 WL 139755 (5th Dist., 1/17/2003). (Appellate court found that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that theappellant-sister's conduct in seeing the appellee-brother's children without his consent knowingly caused her brother or his children mental distress, especially when appellants brother repeatedly allowed his children to stay at their grandmothers tree nursery where he knew appellant was employed. Thus, the stalking civil protection order imposed by the trial court was struck down as there was no evidence that the elements of O.R.C. 2903.211 had been met, and the stalking civil protection order was reversed.)
Keywords: 2903.214, pattern of conduct
Date: 5/15/2003
State v. Ricker
02-LW-0509, No. CA201-04-076 (Butler, 12th App.Dist., 1/22/2002) (There was sufficient evidence of "mental distress" where stalking CPO petitioner felt nauseous and extreme nervousness upon encountering defendant at her place of employment, and where the victim sought the help of a therapist immediately.)
Keywords:
Date: 10/30/2002
Ferdon v. Hoit
02-LW-3166, No. 01CA26 (Guernsey, 5th App.Dist., 8/15/2002) (Victims affidavit and testimony in stalking CPO case demonstrated that she became physically sick and afraid due to stalkers conduct; her state constituted a "temporary substantial incapacity," meeting the definition of "mental distress".)
Keywords:
Date: 10/30/2002
State v. Schwab
(Butler, 12th Dist., 1997), 119 Ohio App.3d 463: Expert testimony not necessary to establish that victim experienced mental distress as a result of offender's behavior; a person acts knowingly when he/she is aware that his/her conduct will probably cause a certain result or will probably be of a certain nature; and evidence was sufficient to allow the trial court to include that defendant knowingly caused mental distress where defendant repeatedly called the victim on the telephone, came to her parents' home where she resided, drove by the parents' home, followed the victim on more than one occasion, attempted to obtain information regarding the victim's college class schedule, and sent the victim unwanted flowers, notes, and letters, causing the victim to be frightened.
Keywords: stalking acts, stalking incidents
Date: 4/23/2002
State v. Rucker
(Butler, 12th Dist., 1/22/02), No. CA2001-04-076, 2002 Ohio App. LEXIS 234: It is not necessary to present expert testimony to establish that a victim experienced mental distress as a result of the offenders behavior. Rather, it is the duty of the trier of fact to determine this.
Keywords:
Date: 4/17/2002
State v. Tichon
(Summit, 9th Dist., 1994), 102 Ohio App.3d 758: Expert testimony not required to establish existence of mental distress of victims and victims' testimony may establish sufficient evidence to support finding that victims suffered mental distress as element of menacing by stalking offense.
Keywords:
Date: 4/17/2002
State v. Grigsby
(No. 1998CA00319 (Stark, 5th Dist., 4/09/99): Mental distress established by victim's testimony concerning her difficulty concentrating at work, her general anxiety, her worrying about her children and her husband; testimony by victim's husband that she became very withdrawn after stalking incidents; and a neighbor's testimony that she observed victim shaken and upset.
Keywords:
Date: 4/17/2002
State v. Hart
(Lorain, No. 00CA00453, 9th Dist, 12/13/00): Judgment against appellant for continually driving by appellants home and following appellants vehicle dangerously close was not against the manifest weight of evidence; evidence was sufficient to prove that appellant acted knowingly and the victims suffered mental distress as a result.
Keywords:
Date: 4/17/2002
City of Middletown v. Hatt
No. CA98-07-150 (Butler, 12th Dist., 01/22/01): Trial court could conclude that beyond a reasonable doubt appellants pattern of conduct including several anonymous phone calls, letters, and other actions caused complainant to suffer from mental distress, as reflected by her work absences and increased stress and health- related problems, and to believe that appellant would cause her physical harm.
Keywords:
Date: 4/17/2002
State v. Bilder
(Summit, 9th Dist., 1994), 99 Ohio App.3d 653: Expert testimony not required to establish existence of mental distress required to support conviction for menacing by stalking and there was sufficient evidence that victim suffered mental distress because of defendant's actions where victim testified that, although he did not go to psychiatrist's office for treatment, he socialized with psychiatrist on a regular basis and consulted him on several occasions concerning the incidents and, additionally, stated that he was emotionally upset by defendant's conduct.
Keywords: stalking acts, stalking incidents
Date: 4/17/2002
