(a)Every person who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the person or property of the person addressed or any member of his or her family, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith.
(b)Every
person who, with intent to annoy or harass, makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by means of an electronic communication device, or makes any combination of calls or contact, to another person is, whether or not conversation ensues from making the telephone call or contact by means of an electronic communication device, guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith or during the ordinary course and scope of business.
(c)Any offense committed by use of a telephone may be deemed to have been committed when and where the telephone call or calls were made or received. Any offense committed by use of an electronic communication device or medium, including the Internet, may be deemed to have been committed when and where the electronic communication or communications were originally sent or first viewed by the recipient.
(d)Subdivision (a) or (b) is violated when the person acting with intent to annoy makes a telephone call or contact by means of an electronic communication device requesting a return call and performs the acts prohibited under subdivision (a) or (b) upon receiving the return call.
(e)Subdivision (a) or (b) is violated when a person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic communication under the person’s control to be used for the purposes prohibited by those subdivisions.
(f)If probation is granted, or the execution or imposition of sentence is suspended, for any person convicted under this section, the court may order as a condition of probation that the person participate in counseling.
(g)For purposes of this section, the term “electronic
communication device” includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, facsimile machines, pagers, personal digital assistants, smartphones, and any other device that transfers signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, or data. “Electronic communication device” also includes, but is not limited to, videophones, TTY/TDD devices, and all other devices used to aid or assist communication to or from deaf or disabled persons. “Electronic communication” has the same meaning as the term defined in Subsection 12 of Section 2510 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
27
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case:
People v. Hamilton, 200 P.3d 898 (Cal. 2009).
People v. Hamilton, 200 P.3d 898 (Cal. 2009).
“’ ” Defendant asserts the court erred when it instructed the jury that they could consider whether defendant’s words to Donna Hatch constituted a threat to Hatch in violation of California Penal Code section 653m (making annoying phone calls), and Texas Penal Code section 42.”
People v. Astalis, 226 Cal. App. Supp. 4th 1 (Cal. App. Dep’t Super. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 7× “(a)), and for making repeated telephone calls and repeated contact by means of an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy or harass (Pen. Code, § 653m, subd. (b)). On appeal, he seeks reversal of only the conviction for making repeated calls and repeated…”
Ritchie v. Konrad, 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1548 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004).
“39 Penal Code section 653m reads: “Telephone calls or contact by electronic communication device with intent to annoy ['][] (a) Every person who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or…”
J.J. v. M.F., 223 Cal. App. 4th 968 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014).
“) Penal Code section 653m, subdivision (b), prohibits a person from making repeated telephone calls with intent to annoy or harass, but “[n]othing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith .”
San Bernardino Cnty. Child. & Fam. Servs. v. S.O., 201 Cal. App. 4th 1057 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011).
“(Pen. Code, § 653m.) 3 Also in April, at the Department’s offices, when the mother saw a particular social worker, she “flipped [the social worker] off and she directed profanity at [the social worker].”
People v. Kucharski, 2013 IL App (2d) 120270 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
“In relevant part, the statute at issue (Cal. Penal Code § 653m) prohibited telephone calls in which the caller (1) telephoned another with the intent to annoy and (2) used obscene language to or about the other person.”
Farris v. Capt. J. B. Fronapfel Co., 182 Cal. App. 3d 982 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986).
“Here we have a Florida resident contracting with a Florida broker to perform a marine survey for the benefit of a California resident with knowledge the vessel would be taken to California.”
People v. Zendejas, 196 Cal. App. 3d 367 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987).
“Code, § 71); (2) making an annoying telephone call, a misdemeanor (Pen. Code, § 653m, subd. (a)); and (3) carrying a concealable firearm concealed within his vehicle, a misdemeanor (Pen.”
People v. Powers, 193 Cal. App. 4th 158 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011).
“If the complaint is by telephone, the call recipient can be a crime victim (Pen. Code, § 653m, subd. (a)). 1 Alternatively, the caller may not threaten to inflict injury on the employee or use obscene language lewdly.”
Wolf v. Superior Court of San Bernardino Cnty., 251 Cal. Rptr. 3d 418 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019).
“( Pen. Code, § 653m, subd. (a).) 1 The trial court (1) granted Petitioner one year of summary probation with the condition she serve one day in jail in lieu of paying fines; and (2) imposed a criminal protective order.”
People v. Astalis (Cal. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 7× “(a)), and for making repeated telephone 26 calls and repeated contact by means of an electronic communication device with the intent to 27 annoy or harass (Pen. Code, § 653m, subd. (b)). On appeal, he seeks reversal of only the 28 conviction for making repeated calls and…”
— Cal. Penal Code § 653m(a) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.