People v. Dietze
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*50OPINION OF THE COURT
Hancock, Jr., J.
Under Penal Law § 240.25 (2), the use of "abusive” language with the intent to "harass” or "annoy” another person is a violation punishable by a 15-day imprisonment. Because the statute, on its face, prohibits a substantial amount of constitutionally protected expression, and because its continued existence presents a significant risk of prosecution for the mere exercise of free speech, we hold section 240.25 (2) to be invalid for overbreadth, under both the State (art I, §8) and Federal (1st & 14th Amends) Constitutions.1 The information, to the extent…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. ButtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Cohen v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Lanzetta v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- City of Houston v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by119 opinions
- Immuno AG. v. Moor-JankowskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- People v. ShackNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. GolbNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. BurkertSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2017
- People v. TichenorNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
114 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.