California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ramirez, F062512 (Cal. App. 2013):
To convict a defendant of violating section 422, the prosecution must prove all of the following elements: "(1) that the defendant 'willfully threaten[ed] to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person,' (2) that the defendant made the threat 'with the specific intent that the statement ... is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out,' (3) that the threatwhich may be 'made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device'was 'on its face and under the circumstances in which it [was] made, ... so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat,' (4) that the threat actually caused the person threatened 'to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family's safety,' and (5) that the threatened person's fear was 'reasonabl[e]' under the circumstances. [Citation.]" (People v. Toledo (2001) 26 Cal.4th 221, 227-228 (Toledo).)
A sustained fear under the statute need only occur over "a period of time that extends beyond what is momentary, fleeting, or transitory." (People v. Allen (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1156 (Allen).) Moreover, in determining if a criminal threat has been made, the jury is entitled to consider "all of the circumstances" and "the threatening statement does not have to be the sole cause of the victim's fear." (People v. Solis (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 1002, 1014 (Solis).)
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.