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).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• R.G. v. R.G.
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2017-03-14· cited 94×
• State v. Castagna
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2008-05-12· cited 35×
• S.B.B. v. L.B.B.
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2023-09-06

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Cesare v. Cesare
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1998-06-03· cited 2,245×
• State v. Johnson
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1964-04-20· cited 1,662×
• State v. Hoffman
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1997-06-25· cited 377×
• In re Return of Weapons to J.W.D.
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1997-05-06· cited 357×
• State v. Mortimer
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1994-05-26· cited 80×
• State v. J.T.
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1996-11-04· cited 27×
• State v. Siegler
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1953-06-15· cited 16×
• State v. V.R.
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2006-08-14· cited 5×