565.090. Harassment, first degree, penalty. — 1. A person commits the offense of harassment in the first degree if he or she, without good cause, engages in any act with the purpose to cause emotional distress to another person, and such act does cause such person to suffer emotional distress.
2. The offense of harassment in the first degree is a class E felony, unless the defendant has previously been found guilty of a violation of this section or section 565.091, or any offense committed in another jurisdiction which, if committed in this state, would be chargeable or indictable as a violation of any offense listed in this section or section 565.091, in which case harassment in the first degree is a class D felony.
3. This section shall not apply to activities of federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement officers conducting investigations of violation of federal, state, county, or municipal law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
54
cases (
19 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case:
State v. Koetting, 691 S.W.2d 328 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985).
State v. Koetting, 691 S.W.2d 328 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 15× “Donald Koetting, defendant, appeals his conviction in the Circuit Court of Osage County of three counts of telephone harassment in violation of § 565.090 RSMo 1978. In a jury waived trial the defendant was sentenced to one year on each of the three counts to run consecutively.”
State v. Durham, 371 S.W.3d 30 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 10× “Introduction Kevin Durham (Durham) appeals from the trial court’s judgment after he was convicted by a jury of two counts of harassment under Section 565.090. 1 On direct appeal, Durham asserts multiple claims of error.”
State v. Creech, 983 S.W.2d 169 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 10× “Defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction and fifty dollar ($50) fine for the misdemeanor crime of telephone harassment under Section 565.090, RSMo 1994. Section 565.090.”
State v. Koetting, 616 S.W.2d 822 (Mo. 1981).
· cites it 7× “A person commits the crime of harassment if for the purpose of frightening or disturbing another person, he (1) Communicates in writing or by telephone a threat to commit any felony; or (2) Makes a telephone call or communicates in writing and uses coarse language offensive to…”
State of Missouri v. Matthew Burl Frye, 566 S.W.3d 658 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 12× “receiving inappropriate messages on Facebook from Frye, and questioned him about those messages. After the interview, Detective Evans arrested Frye for felony harassment.”
State v. Moore, 90 S.W.3d 64 (Mo. 2002).
· cites it 4× “095 makes precise those circumstances where even the most oblivious solicitor must know that his conduct is likely to cause affront or alarm.”
State v. Placke, 733 S.W.2d 847 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 10× “Section 565.090 RSMo 1978. The sufficiency of the evidence is determined by the same standard in a court-tried case as in a jury-tried case.”
State v. McCarty, 956 S.W.2d 365 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 6× “Appellant previously pleaded guilty to a class A misdemeanor charge of harassment, section 565.090, RSMo 1986, against Michelle Stillings in Case Number 494CM0286 in the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri.”
Alexander v. State, 864 S.W.2d 354 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 7× “Alexander contends his right to Due Process was violated because the Amended Information did not sufficiently state a charge under § 565.090, RSMo 1986. That statute states in pertinent part: 1.”
State v. Callen, 45 S.W.3d 888 (Mo. 2001).
· cites it 6× “070, RSMo [assault in the third degree]; subdivisions (1), (3) and (4) of subsection 1 of section 565.090, RSMo [harassment]; subdivision (1) of subsection 1 of section 569.”
State v. Chavez, 165 S.W.3d 545 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 6× “085 RSMo 2000, 1 and of harassment, section 565.090. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of six months in jail on each conviction.”
State v. Uka, 25 S.W.3d 624 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 3× “1999), and one count of harassment, section 565.090 RSMo (1994). Defendant received a sentence of six months’ imprisonment on the harassment count and a suspended imposition of sentence with three years probation on the unlawful use of a weapon count.”
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.090(1)(4): 1 case
Alexander v. State, 864 S.W.2d 354 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).
“Alexander contends his right to Due Process was violated because the Amended Information did not sufficiently state a charge under § 565.090, RSMo 1986. That statute states in pertinent part: 1.”
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.090(4): 1 case
State of Missouri v. Matthew Burl Frye, 566 S.W.3d 658 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).
“receiving inappropriate messages on Facebook from Frye, and questioned him about those messages. After the interview, Detective Evans arrested Frye for felony harassment.”
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 565.090(6): 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.