N.J. Model Criminal Jury Charge, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b

Revised 3/14/11

STALKING

(N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b) (Cases arising before March 21, 2009)

Count of this indictment charges defendant with the crime of stalking.

(Read Indictment)

The applicable statute provides, in pertinent part, that:

A person is guilty of stalking. . . .if he purposely or knowingly engages in a

course of conduct directed at a specifi c person that would cause a reasonable

person to fear bodily injury to himself or a member of his immediate family or to

fear the death of himself or a member of his immediate family.

In order for you to find defendant guilty, the State must prove each of the following

elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. that defendant purposely or knowingly enga ged in a course of conduct directed at

a specific person,

2. that defendant’s course of conduct would cause a reasonable person to be in fear

of bodily injury or death to hi mself/herself or to a member of his/her immediate

family.

(Charge if applicable:

3. that defendant’s conduct did not occur during organized group picketing. 1

The first element that the State must pr ove beyond a reasonable doubt is that defendant

purposefully or knowingly engaged in a course of conduct directed at (name of person).

A person acts purposefully with respect to th e nature of his/her conduct if it is his/her

conscious object to engage in conduct of that na ture. A person acts purposefully with respect to

attendant circumstances if he/she believes or hopes that they exist. A person acts purposefully if

1 See N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10f.

STALKING

(N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b)

he/she acts with design, with a specific intent, with a particular object or purpose, or if he/she

means to do what he/she does.

A person acts knowingly with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or the attendant

circumstances if he/she is aware that his/her conduc t is of that nature, or that such circumstances

exist or if he/she is aware of a high probability of their existence. Purpose and knowledge are

conditions of the mind that cannot be seen and that can be determined only by inferences from

conduct, words or acts. A state of mind is rarely susceptible of direct proof but must ordinarily

be inferred from the facts. Therefore, it is not necessary that the State produce witnesses to

testify that an accused said that he/she had a certain state of mind when he/she engaged in a

particular act. It is within your power to find that such proof has been furnished beyond a

reasonable doubt by inference, which may arise from the nature of defendant’s acts and conduct,

from all that he/she said and did at the pa rticular time and place, and from all surrounding

circumstances.

Course of conduct means repeatedly mainta ining a visual or physical proximity to a

person or repeatedly conveying, or causing to be conveyed, verbal or written threats or threats

conveyed by any other means of communication or threats implied by conduct or a combination

thereof directed at or toward a person.

2

“Repeatedly” means on two or more occasions. 3

Communication means any form of communi cation made by any means, including, but

not limited to, any verbal or written co mmunication, communications conveyed by any

electronic device, which includes, but is not limited to, a wire, radio, electromagnetic,

2 See N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10a(1).

3 See N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10a(2).

STALKING

(N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b)

photoelectric or photooptical system, telephone, including a cordless, cellular or digital

telephone, computer, video recorder, fax machine, pager, or any other means of transmitting

voice or data and communications made by sign or gesture.4

The second element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that

defendant’s course of conduct would cause a reasona ble person to be in fear of bodily injury or

death to himself/herself or to a member of his/her immediate family.

“Bodily injury” means physical pain, illness or any impairment of physical condition. 5

“Immediate family” means a spouse, parent , child, sibling or any other person who

regularly resides in the household or who within the prior six months regularly resided in the

household.

(Charge if Applicable)

The third element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that defendant’s

conduct did not occur during organized group picketing.

If you find that the State has proved ever y element of the offense beyond a reasonable

doubt, then you must find defendant guilty of stal king. If you find that the State has failed to

prove any element of the offense beyond a reas onable doubt, then you must find defendant not

guilty.

[Where the degree of the offense is in question, the following should be charged, if

applicable.]

6

4 N.J.S.A. 2C:1-14q.

5 See N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1.

6 In most cases, where degree is in question, the trial court, after the jury returns its verdict of guilty to

stalking, should then try the issue of degree before the same jury sequen tially; first taking whatever additional

proofs are necessary, then charging the jury with this additional language, under the principles set forth in State v.

Chenique-Puey, 145 N.J. 334 (1996) and State v. Ragland, 105 N.J. 189 (1996).

STALKING

(N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b)

Stalking is ordinarily a crime of the fourth degree. It is, however, a crime of the third

degree if defendant, in committing the crime of stalking:

[Charge the appropriate alternative]

a. Violated an existing court order prohibiting the behavior;

or

b. Committed a second or subsequent offense of stalking against the same victim;

or

c. Was serving a term of imprisonment or was on parole or probation as the result of

a conviction for any indictable offense under the laws of this State, any other state

or the United States.7

If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant committed the crime of stalking, but

do not find that the State has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that in committing the crime,

defendant (charge as appropriate: violated an existing court order prohibiting the behavior,

committed a second or subsequent offense of stalking against the same victim, and/or was

serving a term of imprisonment or was on parole or probation as a result of a conviction for any

indictable offense under the laws of this State, any other state or the United States), then your

verdict must be guilty of fourth-degree stalking.

If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that defe ndant committed the crime of stalking and

further find that the State has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that in committing the crime,

defendant (charge the appropriate: violated an existing court order prohibiting the behavior,

committed a second or subsequent offense of stalking against the same victim, and/or committed

7 This sentencing alternative may require the trial court to sanitize the prior conviction. State v. Brunson ,

132 N.J. 377 (1993). Further, the trial court should grant a defendant’s offer to stipulate to this custodial element.

STALKING

(N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b)

the crime while serving a term of imprisonment or while on parole or probation as a result of a

conviction for any indictable offense under the laws of this State, any other state or the United

States), then your verdict must be guilty of third-degree stalking.8

Cf. State v. Alvarez, 318 N.J. Super. 137, 150-54 (App. Div. 1999).

8 This charge was revised to comply with State v. Gandhi , 201 N.J. 161 (2010), in which the New Jersey

Supreme Court held that the statute does not require a purposeful or knowing mental state with respect to the result

component in the second element.