State v. Castagna

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding the harassment statute was not enacted to “proscribe mere speech, use of language, or other forms of expression”
• determining \purpose may and often must be inferred from what is said and done and the surrounding circumstances\
• stating a defendant's \'purpose to harass' is critical to the constitutionality of the harassment offense\
• explaining to find harassment under N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4, there must be proof that a defendant's conscious object was to \harass\; that is, \'annoy'; 'torment'; 'wear out' [or] 'exhaust.'\ (quoting Webster's II New College Dictionary 504 (1995))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).