Posted by Eugene Volokh:
"Aggressively" Following Someone in a Car for Several Blocks Because of Her
Religion = Felony:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_09-2009_08_15.shtml#1250101217
See yesterday's [1]Minnesota v. Stockwell (Minn. Ct. App.):
MH is a Muslim woman who immigrated to the United States from
Somalia in 1994, and wears a headscarf. On September 12, 2006, MH
was driving on a four-lane road in Rochester to her place of
employment when she noticed a blue van following extremely close.
According to MH, the van was virtually on her bumper and continued
to follow her just as closely after two turns and numerous
opportunities to pass.
MH testified that when she made a left turn into her workplace
parking lot, the van had to wait for oncoming traffic before
turning to follow her. Then the van continued to follow MH into the
parking lot. MH quickly parked and rushed toward the building. The
driver of the van, later identified as appellant, pulled up to the
entrance of the building and rolled down her window. MH further
testified that the driver assumed that she was Muslim, confronted
her about Islamic terrorism and her Islamic religious beliefs, and
told MH that she felt like killing her.
Appellant [Patricia Josephine Stockwell']s testimony provided a
different version of events. Appellant acknowledged that she was
driving a van on September 12, 2006, to pick up her son from
driving school, which was located across the street from MH's
workplace. Appellant testified that she was parked at the driving
school when she observed MH walking from her car to her workplace
door. Appellant testified that she noticed MH because of her
headscarf. According to appellant, she drove across the street and
into the parking lot to speak with MH. Appellant testified that she
did not intend to cause appellant any fear, but stated that she had
strong feelings about radical Islam and wished to share a message
with other people about radical Islam. Appellant denied following
MH or being angry.
At trial, appellant admitted that she was not truthful when she
initially told the police that she had never confronted a Muslim
woman and had never been in the parking lot of the building where
MH worked.
A jury found appellant guilty of one count of felony stalking under
[2]Minn. Stat. § 609.749, subds. 2(a)(2), 3(a)(1) (2006), and
acquitted her of harassment and disorderly conduct. The district
court granted appellant�s request for a downward durational
departure and imposed a 365-day sentence, stayed for two years.
....
[The] conviction for stalking was based on appellant's driving
conduct and not her words in the parking lot. What was said to
appellant in the parking lot was not relevant to the conviction
other than to enhance the conviction [to a felony] on the grounds
that appellant followed and pursued MH because of MH's religion....
While a person can be convicted for a single act of stalking under
the stalking-harassment provision of the Minnesota statute, [the
statute] requires an element of intent because the statute requires
that a person be harassing someone by following them.... [T]o
harass �means to engage in intentional conduct which: (1) the actor
knows or has reason to know would cause the victim under the
circumstances to feel frightened, threatened, oppressed,
persecuted, or intimidated; and (2) causes this reaction on the
part of the victim.� Minn. Stat. § 609.749, subd. 1 (emphasis
added)....
Here, appellant's conduct of aggressively pursuing MH in a vehicle
for several blocks clearly falls within the statute's
prohibitions....
I should note that the case struck me as noteworthy because the
"conviction for stalking was based on appellant's driving conduct and
not her words in the parking lot" (presumably since the words were the
subject of the harassment and disorderly charges on which Stockwell
was acquitted). Had the jury convicted her of making a death threat
(based on the allegation that Stockwell "told MH that she felt like
killing her"), treating the crime as a felony would have seemed to me
much more sensible.
References
1. http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/coa/current/OPa081900-0811.pdf
2. https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=609.749
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
