FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWYERS

Hunterdon County Harassment Defense Lawyers

You got charged with harassment last week in Hunterdon County, maybe after you sent repeated text messages to your ex-partner in Flemington asking to talk things through and they filed a complaint saying you were harassing them, maybe after you posted comments on social media about your neighbor in Clinton describing your property line dispute and they claimed you were harassing them online, maybe after you sent multiple emails to a coworker in Readington about a workplace conflict and HR filed criminal charges, maybe after you called your former friend late at night several times because you needed to discuss an urgent matter and they accused you of harassment, maybe after a domestic argument with your spouse in Raritan Township where you were accused of offensive touching or threatening language, maybe after you commented on someone’s Facebook posts or Instagram photos and they claimed it was harassment, maybe after you texted someone repeatedly at 2am trying to resolve a dispute. You don’t know whether you’re facing a petty disorderly persons offense with 30 days maximum jail and a $500 fine or a fourth-degree indictable offense with 18 months in state prison and a $10,000 fine. You don’t understand what “purpose to harass” means or whether merely annoying someone or expressing frustration constitutes criminal harassment. You don’t know whether the text messages you sent, social media posts you made, or emails you wrote will be used as evidence against you. You don’t know whether your case stays in Hunterdon County municipal court or gets forwarded to Superior Court in Flemington. You don’t understand the difference between regular harassment under N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4 versus cyber harassment under N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4.1 which carries more serious penalties. You don’t know what “extremely inconvenient hours” means or what constitutes “offensively coarse language” versus merely rude speech. You don’t know whether your speech is protected by the First Amendment or whether police have sufficient evidence to prove you intended to harass rather than just communicate. You’re concerned about a permanent criminal record that will show up on background checks for jobs, housing, and education. You’re concerned about restraining orders and whether harassment charges accompany domestic violence allegations. You’re concerned about whether you qualify for conditional dismissal that could result in charges being dismissed with no permanent record. You’re concerned about losing your job if convicted, being ineligible for professional licenses, having college applications affected, and the stigma of a criminal conviction.

The answer depends on multiple factors including whether the prosecution can prove you acted with purpose to harass beyond a reasonable doubt, whether your communications were merely annoying versus truly harassing, whether your speech is constitutionally protected, whether the timing of communications was extremely inconvenient or just inconvenient, whether the language you used was offensively coarse or merely rude, whether the alleged victim was actually alarmed or seriously annoyed, whether you qualify for conditional dismissal as a first-time offender. Petty disorderly persons harassment charges are handled in the municipal court where the offense occurred with a maximum penalty of 30 days in county jail and a $500 fine under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-8. Fourth-degree harassment applies when you’re in prison, on probation, or on parole when the harassment occurs and carries up to 18 months in state prison and a $10,000 fine under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6. Cyber harassment is always a fourth-degree crime carrying the same 18-month and $10,000 penalties. All petty disorderly persons harassment cases in Hunterdon County are prosecuted in municipal courts such as Flemington Municipal Court, Clinton Town Municipal Court, Readington Township Municipal Court, Lebanon Township Municipal Court, and Raritan Township Municipal Court. Fourth-degree harassment and cyber harassment cases are prosecuted by the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office at Superior Court in Flemington.

Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group. Our founder Todd Spodek earned his Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice from Northeastern University and his Juris Doctor from Pace Law School in White Plains, New York. Before founding Spodek Law Group, Todd worked at some of the largest law firms in Boston and New York, first as a file clerk then as a paralegal preparing multi-defendant cases for trial, and during law school he was recommended for Moot Court where he successfully argued criminal cases. Todd is a second-generation attorney – Spodek Law Group was originally established in 1976, making it a nearly 50-year-old family-owned criminal defense practice. With over 20 years of experience, Todd has handled thousands of tough cases and secured numerous acquittals at trial including Felony Murder, Depraved Indifference Murder, Assault, Robbery, Menacing, Harassment, and Predatory Sexual Assault. His work has garnered national media attention – he represented Anna Delvey (Anna Sorokin) in her high-profile grand larceny case which was featured in a Netflix special series released in 2022, represented the juror at the center of Ghislaine Maxwell’s bid for a mistrial, and handled the Faith Walk Ministry case involving over $1.2 million in fraud charges. Todd’s work has been featured in the New York Post, Newsweek, Fox 5, Business Insider, and Bloomberg. Spodek Law Group has received over 700 client reviews. We’ve represented many, many clients charged with harassment throughout Hunterdon County municipal courts over nearly five decades, many, many successful outcomes including dismissals based on insufficient evidence, conditional dismissals for first-time offenders, and trial acquittals. If you’re reaching out to us – we understand the stakes you’re facing.

Harassment Elements and Purpose Requirement

Harassment under N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4 requires the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you acted with purpose to harass another person and that you engaged in one of the specific types of conduct defined by the statute. The purpose element is critical – the prosecution must prove you had a conscious objective to harass, not merely that you annoyed someone or communicated in a way they found unpleasant. Communication-based harassment occurs when you make or cause to be made communications that are anonymous, at extremely inconvenient hours, in offensively coarse language, or in any other manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm. Anonymous communications include phone calls where you don’t identify yourself, messages sent from fake social media accounts, or emails from anonymous addresses. Extremely inconvenient hours typically means late night or early morning calls like 2am or 3am, though what’s “extremely inconvenient” depends on the circumstances – calling someone at 11pm once may not be harassment but calling repeatedly at that hour may be. Offensively coarse language means language that goes beyond merely rude or inconsiderate speech to language that is vulgar, profane, or sexually explicit in a way designed to offend. Physical harassment occurs when you subject another person to striking, kicking, shoving, or other offensive touching, or when you threaten to do so. Alarming conduct harassment occurs when you engage in any course of alarming conduct or repeatedly commit acts with purpose to alarm or seriously annoy the other person. This is the broadest category and can include following someone, showing up repeatedly at their home or workplace, or engaging in patterns of behavior designed to alarm or seriously annoy.

The distinction between merely annoying behavior and criminal harassment is crucial. Expressing your opinion, even rudely, is generally protected speech under the First Amendment. Communicating with someone about a legitimate dispute, even if they find it annoying, is not automatically harassment if you’re not acting with purpose to harass. Sending one or two text messages or emails, even if unwelcome, typically doesn’t constitute harassment unless the content is threatening or the communication is part of a repeated pattern. The prosecution must prove your subjective intent – that you consciously wanted to harass the other person. If you were merely trying to communicate, express frustration, resolve a dispute, or exercise your right to free speech without intent to harass, then you haven’t committed harassment even if the other person was annoyed. Todd Spodek challenges harassment charges by cross-examining the complainant about whether they were truly alarmed or just annoyed, questioning whether your communications were merely exercises of free speech, demonstrating that your intent was to communicate not to harass, and showing that isolated incidents or sporadic communications don’t constitute the repeated pattern required for harassment convictions.

Defenses and Todd Spodek’s Approach

Defenses to harassment in Hunterdon County include challenging whether you acted with purpose to harass by showing you were merely trying to communicate about a legitimate issue, express an opinion, or resolve a dispute. Another powerful defense is First Amendment protection – political speech, opinions about matters of public concern, and other constitutionally protected expression cannot be criminalized as harassment even if the speech annoys or upsets someone. You can challenge whether communications were at “extremely inconvenient hours” by showing the times were reasonable given the circumstances or that isolated calls at late hours don’t establish a pattern. You can challenge whether language was “offensively coarse” by demonstrating it was merely rude or blunt rather than vulgar or profane. If you’re accused of physical harassment you can argue self-defense or show the physical contact was accidental not intentional. You can challenge whether the alleged victim was actually alarmed or seriously annoyed or whether their reaction was exaggerated. If charges are based on a single incident you can argue that one communication or one encounter doesn’t constitute the repeated acts required for harassment. False accusation defenses show the complainant fabricated or exaggerated allegations due to a custody dispute, property conflict, workplace rivalry, or other motivation.

Todd Spodek employs sophisticated defense strategies in harassment cases honed over two decades of trial work. He challenges the sufficiency of evidence by demonstrating that text messages, emails, or social media posts don’t show purpose to harass but rather show attempts to communicate or express opinions. He cross-examines complainants about their motivations for filing charges, their own conduct that may have provoked the communications, and inconsistencies in their testimony. He files motions to dismiss when charges are based on constitutionally protected speech or when the prosecution cannot prove intent to harass beyond a reasonable doubt. In Hunterdon County specifically, Todd has handled many, many harassment cases in municipal courts throughout the county and understands how municipal prosecutors evaluate these cases. His experience defending clients in the most serious criminal cases – Felony Murder, Assault, Robbery – gives him the trial skills to aggressively defend harassment charges, understanding that a permanent criminal record can devastate employment, housing, and educational opportunities even for charges perceived as minor.

Many first-time defendants in Hunterdon County qualify for conditional dismissal under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-13.1 which suspends charges for 6-12 months while you complete conditions such as anger management classes, no-contact orders, or community service, after which charges are dismissed permanently with no conviction and no criminal record. If you’re convicted of harassment the conviction creates a permanent criminal record that appears on background checks conducted by employers, landlords, colleges, and professional licensing boards. The conviction cannot be expunged for five years under N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2. Many employers in healthcare, education, government, childcare, and positions of public trust will disqualify applicants with criminal records. Professional licensing boards may deny licenses based on harassment convictions. College admissions officers review criminal records and may deny admission or revoke scholarships. Landlords routinely deny rental applications from individuals with criminal records. Todd Spodek and Spodek Law Group understand these long-term consequences and fight aggressively to prevent permanent criminal records through conditional dismissals, trial acquittals, or negotiated dispositions that avoid convictions.

Call 212-300-5196.