Annoying Phone Calls

A making annoying phone calls charge may come with a criminal threat charge if serious threats were made to the other person. Under PC Section 646.9, it is a crime to willfully follow and harass another person, and to make credible threats that may place the other person in serious harm. This also includes serious threats made to anyone in the other person’s family.

This can be related to a making annoying phone calls charge if you have made threats over the phone, or any other electronic communications device, to another person. A criminal threat charge can make the annoying phone calls more dangerous to the victim; thus, the punishment is more severe. Along with the penalties related to making phone calls, this charge can lead to up to one (1) year in county jail, a maximum fine of $1,000, or both. Again, the court will consider the circumstances and the defendant's criminal history to determine the severity of the charge. At most, you can be imprisoned in a state prison.

Examples:

• Marco stalks his ex-girlfriend and makes serious, potentially dangerous, threats against her and her family.
• Anna cyberstalks her former boss for firing her, and makes serious, dangerous threats on social media. Anna can be charged with making criminal threats.

Often times, a person charged with making annoying and harassing phone calls has had some kind of pre-existing relationship with the other address. It is also possible that the person charged with making annoying calls may have had a restraining order from a previous incident with the victim. If so, by continually calling, the defendant may be found in violation of that restraining order and can be charged as such.

As outlined by PC Section 273.6, an intentional violation of a restraining or protective order is a misdemeanor. The penalties for such an offense include: one (1) year in jail and/or a maximum fine of $1,000. If the violation of the restraining order results in physical injury, then the defendant faces a fine of up to $2,000, a minimum 30-day to one (1) year in county jail, or both. However, these penalties can also be reduce depending on the circumstances of each case and on the defendant's criminal history.

Under PC Section 646.9(b), a continuance of stalking and harassing another person while a restraining order is in effect is a serious crime—this can include making annoying phone calls. This can lead to imprisonment in a state prison for up to two (2), three (3), or four (4) years as determined from the circumstances of each case.

Examples:

• A restraining order was issued against Phil by his ex-wife. Despite the order, Phil violates it by making contact with his children. Phil faces a violating a restraining order offense.
• Regine was issued a restraining order by a celebrity for previous stalking. Angered, she continues to stalk the celebrity online, and making annoying and threatening messages. Regine may face an annoying phone calls and violating a restraining order charges.

Making annoying phone calls may also be found in connection with stalking or cyberstalking. As outlined by PC Section 646.9, stalking consists of willfully following and harassing another person while making credible threats to his or her safety. Cyberstalking consists of using an electronic communications device to commit the same kind of behavior. If you follow someone around and making obscene comments over the phone, or any other device, you can be charged with both stalking and making annoying phone calls. If you made repeated, harassing phone calls while stalking another person, then you can be charged with both making annoying phones calls and stalking.

Stalking, and cyberstalking, is a wobbler offense in the state of California. Depending on the circumstances surrounding each case and the defendant's previous criminal history, the offense can either be charged as a misdemeanor or felony. If the offense is a misdemeanor, the defendant potentially faces up to one (1) year in county jail, a maximum fine of $1,000, or both. If the offense is a felony, the defendant potentially faces a maximum penalty of up to five (5) years in California state prison.

Examples:

• Samantha follows her ex-boyfriend around town. The ex-boyfriend begins to fear about his safety because of her actions.
• Bob makes obscene phone calls, and continues follows a woman around.

First of all, in order to be convicted of making annoying phones calls, it needs to be proven that you have made repeated phone calls or another type of electronic communication. The most important part of this element is the use of a phone or any other electronic communication device. These annoying calls or messages need to have been made through an electronic device, or else you cannot be charged with making annoying phone calls in the state of California.

An electronic communication device includes: telephones, cell phones, computers, pagers, fax machines, tablets, and more. Communication made via text message, e-mail, letters by fax, photos sent from a smartphone, or messages through social media can all count as forms of making annoying phones calls if repeatedly made.

Remember: even if the victim called you back, you can still be convicted if you continued to harass or annoy the individual. Also, if you knowingly let another person use an electronic communications device under your control to make annoying calls, you can still be charged—even if it was not you that actually made the obscene or harassing comments.

Again, if you did not make repeated contact with another person via an electronic communications device, you cannot be convicted of making annoying phone calls due to a lack of the “phone call” element in the incident.

Another important element in making annoying phone call cases that must be proven is the use of obscene language, or the making of a threat through the phone calls. You can only be convicted of making annoying phone calls if you used obscene language or if you threatened to injury or place another person in danger.

Despite its importance in these type of cases, obscene language can be a little difficult to pin down exactly. Obscene language typically includes the usage of sexually graphic language. However, in California, obscene can also include language the victim finds “offensive” or inappropriate. This can also include the usage of profanity. It is important to know that what might be “obscene” in one case may not be “obscene” in another. The level of obscenity can shift depending on the context of the communications and/or the relationship between the caller and the receiver.

It can be a little tricky to exactly can be labeled as obscene; however, it is a crucial element in making annoying phone call cases.

Another crucial element in making phone call cases is whether the defendant intended to purposefully harass or annoy the victim. If you sent the messages or made the calls in good faith, or for some other purpose such as business, then you cannot be charged with making annoying phone calls. Again, this can come down to the circumstances and the context around which these calls were made. If the caller believed that he or she made these annoying calls in jest, then the caller cannot be charged.

There needs to be a clear intention to harass or annoy the victim in these types of cases. If not, you cannot be charged with making annoying calls.

Quite simply, if you made these calls in good faith and without the intent to annoy or harass, you cannot be charged. A making annoying phone calls charge can only arises if you intended to annoy or harass the other address.

Without the use obscene language, or a threat, in these calls, there is not sufficient evidence for a making annoying phone calls offense. More than this, you could argue that what you said through an electronic communications device was not actually obscene or offensive. It is possible the circumstances of the communication or the context contributed to a sense of harassment or annoyance to the receiver; however, the meaning of the phone call could have been mistaken by the receiver.

Lastly, if you suffer from mental or emotional trouble, it is possible this charge can be dropped.

With an insanity defense, the defendant cannot be convicted since he or she was unable to understand the actions taken at the time of the crime, and that he or she could not differentiate between right and wrong at the time of the offense.