P. v. ORourke
Defendant James ORourke was a pretty scary neighbor. Four people living on his street testified he often shined a high intensity beam flashlight into their windows, yelled and cursed at them, gave them the middle finger, displayed a gun, threatened them, ran through their yard, sprayed one with a hose, and vandalized their property. A jury convicted him of four counts of stalking -- one count for each victim. (Pen. Code, 646.9, subd. (a).)[1] On appeal, he contends the trial court committed reversible error by failing to give a unanimity instruction. (CALCRIM No. 3500.) We agree with the courts in the Second and Fourth Appellate Districts that a unanimity instruction is unnecessary where, as here, the stalking statute contemplates a continuing course of conduct. (People v. Jantz (2006) 137 Cal.App.4th 1283, 1292 (Jantz); People v. Zavala (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 758, 768 (Zavala).) Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. ORourke