Stalking in the Fourth Degree

Definition under New York law

PL 120.45 · Original statutory wording; excerpts must be read together with the full section.

§ 120.45 Stalking in the fourth degree. A person is guilty of stalking in the fourth degree when he or she intentionally, and for no legitimate purpose, engages in a course of conduct directed at a specific person, and knows or reasonably should know that such conduct: 1. is likely to cause reasonable fear of material harm to the physical health, safety or property of such person, a member of such person's immediate family or a third party with whom such person is acquainted; or 2. causes material harm to the mental or emotional health of such person, where such conduct consists of following, telephoning or initiating communication or contact with such person, a member of such person's immediate family or a third party with whom such person is acquainted, and the actor was previously clearly informed to cease that conduct; or 3. is likely to cause such person to reasonably fear that his or her employment, business or career is threatened, where such conduct consists of appearing, telephoning or initiating communication or contact at such person's place of employment or business, and the actor was previously clearly informed to cease that conduct. For the purposes of subdivision two of this section, "following" shall include the unauthorized tracking of such person's movements or location through the use of a global positioning system or other device. Stalking in the fourth degree is a class B misdemeanor.

In everyday language

This offense concerns an intentional course of conduct directed at a specific person without a legitimate purpose. Its alternative routes address likely reasonable fear of material physical, safety or property harm, actual material mental or emotional harm from specified contacts after a clear stop instruction, or likely reasonable fear for employment, business or career from specified workplace contacts after a clear stop instruction.

At a criminal trial, the prosecutor must prove every element of the charged subsection and that you committed the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. An accusation is not proof of guilt. Where the statute provides alternatives, the prosecutor need not prove every alternative; the charged theory matters. Affirmative defenses may have different proof rules.