Criminal defense · D.C. Superior Court

Criminal Offense of "Stalking" in D.C.

The criminal offense of stalking in Washington, D.C. is a course of conduct directed at a specific person that the defendant intended, knew or should have known would cause that person substantial fear, alarm or emotional distress, and a conviction in D.C. Superior Court carries up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $2,500. Jamison Koehler defends people charged with stalking in D.C.
CourtD.C. Superior Court
Maximum penaltyUp to a year of imprisonment, a fine of up to $2,500, or both
Course of conductTwo or more occasions, each 24-hour period treated as a separate occasion
Mental stateObjective standard: what a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have known
First-time offendersOften offered a non-trial diversion program

What is stalking under D.C. law?

D.C. law defines "stalking" as a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes that person to experience substantial fear, alarm or emotional distress.

The criminal offense of stalking in D.C. has a narrow definition with two main requirements: there must be a course of conduct directed at a specific person, and the defendant must have intended, known or should have known that the conduct would cause the other person to experience substantial fear, alarm or emotional distress.

What counts as a course of conduct in a D.C. stalking case?

A "course of conduct" can include following, monitoring, placing under surveillance, threatening or interfering with someone, either directly or through a third party.

A course of conduct requires two or more occasions, with each 24-hour period treated as a separate occasion. In the case of an anti-stalking order petition, at least one of the instances must have occurred within 90 days of the petition.

The course of conduct must be directed at a specific individual, and the defendant must have possessed the requisite mental state on at least two of the alleged occasions. The statute does not cover constitutionally protected activities, such as speech covered under the First Amendment.

Does the government have to prove the defendant meant to cause fear?

The government must prove that the defendant intended, knew or should have known that the conduct would cause the other person substantial fear, alarm or emotional distress. The required mental state is an objective standard: what an objectively reasonable person in the defendant's position would have known.

How much fear, alarm or emotional distress does a stalking charge require?

The conduct must be such that the defendant intended, knew or should have known it would cause the other person to fear for his or her safety or the safety of another person; to experience serious alarm, disturbance or fright; or to suffer emotional distress.

The degree of emotional distress required is significant. The stalking statute is meant to prohibit seriously troubling conduct, not mere unpleasant or mildly worrying encounters. To trigger criminal liability, the level of fear, alarm or emotional distress must rise significantly above that which is commonly experienced in day-to-day living and must involve a severe intrusion on the victim's person, privacy and autonomy.

"Emotional distress" is defined as "significant mental suffering or distress that may, but does not necessarily, require medical or other professional treatment or counseling." "Fear for safety" means "fear of significant injury or a comparable harm."

What are the penalties for a stalking conviction in D.C.?

A conviction for stalking in Washington, D.C. can result in a fine of up to $2,500, imprisonment for up to a year, or both.

First-time offenders are often offered some type of non-trial diversion program. However, stalking is considered a serious offense for which a D.C. Superior Court judge may impose a period of incarceration depending on the specific circumstances.

What clients say

In their words.

Attorney Koehler is the kind of lawyer I believed there could be. He is a true practitioner of the law, the way it should be done. He is a good person with clear ethics and character, and brilliant and kind. I would trust him with my life and serious circumstances. I did, in fact. It was the right decision. He won. We prevailed. He is someone I would recommend to my dearest loved ones. Attorney Koehler is a special lawyer in a class all his own.
J.P., Respondent, Anti-Stalking Order
The testimonials are examples of what clients have posted about Jamison Koehler on legal referral sites. The outcome of a criminal case depends on factors unique to that case. By posting these testimonials, Koehler Law does not imply that it can achieve the same result in every case.
Did you know

What people get wrong about Stalking in Washington, D.C.

People think

Stalking is a minor charge in D.C.

Actually

A conviction carries up to a year of imprisonment and a fine of up to $2,500, and a D.C. Superior Court judge may impose incarceration depending on the circumstances.

People think

What the defendant actually meant decides the case.

Actually

The mental state is an objective standard: what an objectively reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have known the conduct would cause.

People think

If the other person was upset, that is enough for a stalking conviction.

Actually

The fear, alarm or emotional distress must rise significantly above ordinary day-to-day experience and involve a severe intrusion on the victim’s person, privacy and autonomy. Mildly worrying encounters do not meet the standard.

People think

A single frightening encounter can be charged as stalking.

Actually

A course of conduct requires two or more occasions, with each 24-hour period treated as a separate occasion.

People think

Stalking only means physically following someone.

Actually

A course of conduct can also include monitoring, placing under surveillance, threatening or interfering with someone, directly or through a third party.

    Questions people ask

    Frequently asked questions.

    A stalking charge turns on whether the alleged conduct actually meets the statute's narrow definition: two or more occasions, a specific target, and distress that rises well above everyday life. Call Jamison Koehler to talk through your case.