Commonwealth v. Klingel
22 Pa. D. & C.5th 63
Pennsylvania Court of Common P...2011Background
- June 17–18, 2010 criminal process initiated against Klingel for disorderly conduct and harassment; waivers of counsel and jury trial entered; non-jury trial held.
- Information charged one count disorderly conduct under 18 Pa.C.S.A. §5503(a)(4) and one count harassment under §2709(a)(3).
- May 25, 2010 surveillance video and testimony show Klingel urinating on the Wagners’ fence, harassing acts, and entry onto their property after requests to stay off.
- Wagners had previously fenced their property and installed no-trespassing signs; Klingel challenged ownership of lot 43/part of lot 44; litigation over ownership existed (adverse possession finding favoring Elder, later conveyed to Wagners).
- Court found not guilty of disorderly conduct and guilty of harassment after ruling the conduct lacked a public setting and legitimate purpose; sentencing scheduled for March 22, 2011; court cautioned against future encroachments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disorderly conduct requires public setting and specific intent | Commonwealth: conduct affected the public and showed intent to cause public inconvenience | Klingel: conduct occurred on private property; no public disruption | Not proven beyond a reasonable doubt; acquitted on disorderly conduct |
| Harassment requires course of conduct serving no legitimate purpose | Commonwealth: repeated acts show harassment with no legitimate purpose | Klingel: acts may have private purposes; some acts could have legitimate purpose | Proven beyond a reasonable doubt; convicted on harassment |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Burton, 445 A.2d 191 (Pa. Super. 1982) (elements of disorderly conduct require proof of public inconvenience and requisite mens rea)
- Commonwealth v. Maerz, 879 A.2d 1267 (Pa. Super. 2005) (reckless disregard suffices for intent in disorderly conduct case)
- Commonwealth v. Coon, 695 A.2d 794 (Pa. Super. 1997) (defines mens rea for disorderly conduct and public-place requirement)
- Commonwealth v. Battaglia, 725 A.2d 192 (Pa. Super. 1999) (course of conduct requires more than a single act and no legitimate purpose)
- Commonwealth v. Lutes, 793 A.2d 949 (Pa. Super. 2002) (intent to harass inferred from totality of circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Tedesco, 550 A.2d 796 (Pa. Super. 1988) (defines course of conduct as pattern of acts evidencing continuity)