## Facts

- Angie Rizzo met Cesar Lopez at a public library when she was a teenager; they became friendly.
- After Rizzo turned 18, Lopez groped and attempted to kiss her; she began avoiding him.
- Over many years, Lopez repeatedly contacted Rizzo through calls, emails, letters, and packages despite her lack of response and requests that he stop.
- Lopez disclosed he had spent years building a labyrinth shaped like Rizzo’s face near her running route and told her he wanted to meet for a “cleansing ceremony” there.
- Rizzo contacted police; an officer instructed Lopez to stop contacting her, and Lopez acknowledged his conduct might have upset her and said he would stop.
- After police involvement, Lopez continued appearing where Rizzo would be, including near the labyrinth, and repeatedly in her neighborhood while claiming (falsely) to live there.
- One night after being questioned by police, Lopez hid near Rizzo’s home in the dark and stepped out as she walked by; Rizzo told him he was scaring her and to leave her alone.
- Rizzo reported that Lopez never expressly threatened physical harm, but she repeatedly said she was frightened and wanted the conduct to stop.
- Lopez was charged with stalking under California Penal Code § 646.9(a) and was convicted by a jury; the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and granted formal probation.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the finding of a “credible threat” under Penal Code § 646.9(a) where no express threat of violence was made.
2. Whether substantial evidence supported the finding that Lopez intended to place the victim in reasonable fear for her safety.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the stalking conviction.
- The court held substantial evidence supported the jury’s finding that Lopez made a “credible threat,” including one implied by a pattern of conduct.
- The court held substantial evidence supported the finding that Lopez intended to place Rizzo in reasonable fear, based on circumstantial evidence and his continued conduct after knowing it frightened her.
- The court rejected the argument that the communications and artwork were protected speech as applied, concluding the conviction rested on conduct constituting a credible threat.

## Legal Principles

- Under Penal Code § 646.9, a “credible threat” may be implied by a pattern of conduct and does not require an express verbal threat of physical harm.
- A credible threat requires that the threat (express or implied) appear capable of being carried out and actually cause the victim to reasonably fear for safety.
- Intent to place the victim in reasonable fear may be proved by circumstantial evidence, including persistence after the victim communicates fear and requests cessation, and after police warnings.
- Communications and expressive acts that form part of a course of conduct constituting a credible threat may fall outside First Amendment protection as a “true threat” for stalking purposes.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the stalking conviction because the prolonged course of unwanted contacts and appearances—especially after explicit requests and police intervention—supported findings of an implied credible threat and intent to place the victim in reasonable fear, notwithstanding the absence of an express threat of violence.


People v. Lopez, 240 Cal. App. 4th 436, 192 Cal. Rptr. 3d 585 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)