California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Shivers, 186 Cal.Rptr.3d 352, 235 Cal.App.4th Supp. 8 (Cal. Super. 2015):
Penal Code section 653.2, subdivision (a), specifies that a person is guilty if he or she electronically distributes a harassing message which would ... likely ... incite or produce the third party's action. Defendant's reading of the statute eliminates the modifier likely, and would criminalize the proscribed acts only if a person's message incite[d] or produce[d] unlawful action. [A] statute should not be given a construction that results in rendering one of its provisions nugatory. [Citations.] [Citation.] If possible, significance should be given to every word, phrase, sentence and part of an act in pursuance of the legislative purpose. [Citation.] (People v. Hicks (1993) 6 Cal.4th 784, 796, 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 469, 863 P.2d 714, fn. omitted.) The plain meaning of the words used reveals no requirement that actual incitement or actual production of the enumerated unlawful effects be caused by a person's electronic distribution of a message. The only requirement is that a defendant's message is likely to incite or produce third party actions.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.