Criminal offense of "stalking" in D.C.

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.

Koehler Law limits its practice to criminal defense and protection order litigation in D.C. Superior Court. If you are facing a stalking charge or an anti-stalking order petition, please contact us at 202-549-2374.

WHAT IS “STALKING” UNDER D.C. LAW?

Disputes among co-workers, neighbors, roommates, or former romantic partners are often mischaracterized as instances of stalking behavior. In fact, 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;
The defendant/respondent intended, knew or should have known that the conduct would cause the other person to experience substantial fear, alarm or emotional distress

1. Stalking requires a course of conduct directed at a specific person.

A “course of conduct” can include following, monitoring, placing under surveillance, threatening or interfering with someone, either directly or through a third party. D.C. Code § 22-3133.

“Course of conduct” requires two or more occasions, with each 24-hour period treated as a separate occasion. In the case of an ASO 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. Graham v. T.T., 347 A.3d 357, 363 (D.C. 2025)(“there is no indication that Mr. Graham ‘directed’ his food-stealing specifically at T.T.”)

The defendant/respondent must have possessed the requisite mental state on at least two of the alleged occasions. Coleman v. United States, 202 A.3d 1127, 1140 (D.C. 2019). Moreover, the required mental state is an objective standard. Id. at 1143 (“the ‘should have known’ language refers to . . .what an objectively reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have known”).

The statute does not cover constitutionally protected activities, such as speech covered under the First Amendment. Mashaud v. Boone, 295 A.3d 1139, 1148-49 (D.C. 2023)(Any content-based speech restrictions under the statute apply only to those narrow categories that are not protected by the First Amendment: threats, obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement and speech integral to criminal conduct).

2. Stalking requires that the defendant/respondent intended, knew or should have known that the conduct would cause the other person to experience substantial fear, alarm or emotional distress.

D.C.’s stalking statute breaks down the required emotional effects of stalking into the three categories. Specifically, the actions in question are required to cause the target of the behavior to:

fear for his or her safety or the safety of another person;
feel seriously alarmed, disturbed, or frightened; or
suffer emotional distress.

Parties frequently underestimate the degree of emotional distress that is required under the statute. Please note, for example, that the phrase “alarmed, disturbed, or frightened” is modified by the adverb “seriously.”

“[T]he stalking statute is meant to prohibit seriously troubling conduct, not mere unpleasant or mildly worrying encounters that occur on a regular basis in any community.” Coleman, 202 A.3d at 1144.

“[T]o 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 persona; privacy and autonomy.” Keerikkattil v. United States, 313 A.3d 591, 607 (D.C. 2024)(quoting Coleman with approval).

“Emotional distress” is defined as “significant mental suffering or distress that may, but does not necessarily, require medical or other professional treatment of counseling.” D.C. Code § 22-3132(4).

“Fear for safety” means “fear of significant injury or a comparable harm.” Coleman, 202 A.2d at 1144.

WILL I GO TO JAIL IF I AM CONVICTED OF STALKING?

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. At the same time, stalking is considered a serious offense for which, depending on the specific circumstances, a D.C. Superior Court judge may well impose a period of incarceration.

WILL I NEED A LAWYER FOR A D.C. STALKING CASE?

You have an absolute right to defend yourself in either a criminal case or as a party to an anti-stalking order. That said, it is not usually a good idea to represent yourself in any type of legal case.

WHY CHOOSE KOEHLER LAW?

Focusing exclusively on criminal and protection order matters in D.C. Superior Court, Koehler Law has litigated hundreds of trials. We know how things are done. As evidenced by the testimonials on this website and elsewhere, our firm has a stellar reputation for effectiveness, capability and, most importantly, favorable results on behalf of our clients.

Koehler Law has also had substantial success dealing specifically with stalking and ant-stalking order cases. In August 2026, for example, a D.C. Superior Court judge denied a civil protection order petition involving a stalking allegation against a Koehler Law client. The client described the representation this way:

Mr. Koehler represented me in a CPO case, and from the very beginning he was honest, compassionate, attentive, and incredibly communicative. He never sugarcoated anything, but he also never left me wondering what was happening or what came next.

The client also highlighted Mr. Koehler’s ability to provide calm, clear guidance during a stressful period in her life:

When emotions were running high and I felt overwhelmed, he stayed steady. He never matched the chaos, he brought clarity. That made all the difference.

Our client concluded:

[Mr. Koehler] fought for me, he believed in my case, and he won. I will always be grateful for his representation.

Last updated: September 6, 2026