SAN DIEGO CRIMINAL DEFENSE: SWEARING AND OBSCENITIES
SWEARING AND OBSCENITIES
Here's one close to my heart since I just got off with Barnes & Noble's customer service rep after being on the line for 123 minutes.....
The Court says that the issue in this case is whether "complaints laced with references to bovine excrement, body parts and other vulgarities derived from sexually-related terms" violates PC 653m(a), the annoying phone call statute.
That statute requires threats to inflict injury or use obscene language lewdly. The defendant said lots of nasty things, but made no threats and the language wasn't used lewdly. So this ain't a violation of 653m. Incidentally, the calls were made to the customer comment line of Coldstone Creamery. (Maybe I can rent him to give Barnes & Noble a few calls?)
In his many, many profanity-laced phone calls to the comment line, the defendant explains that he really loves their ice cream, especially their pumpkin flavor. He says he goes there 400 times a year, but he feels ripped off because he believes the 48 ounce size isn't actually 48 ounces. (I'm channeling The Biggest Loser) In addition, he's annoyed by other customers. This is certainly obnoxious, but it's not a violation of 653m, sayeth this C/A.
People v. Powers; 2011 DJ DAR 3318; DJ, 3/3/11; C/A 2nd, Div. 6
