Ted Hoying, the defendant, was convicted by a jury in the Court of Common Pleas, of menacing by stalking and intimidation of a victim. He was sentenced to a total of six and one-half years in prison. The defendant appealed. The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed.

Facts

Ted Hoying met the victim, Kelly Criswell, when they both worked at a local restaurant. In June 2002, Hoying asked Criswell for a date and became quite angry when she declined. When Hoying persisted in contacting Ms. Criswell after she left her employment with the restaurant, Ms. Criswell obtained a civil protection order against Hoying in February 2003. Subsequently, between August 15, 2003, and September 7, 2003, Hoying sent 105 e-mails to Ms. Criswell in violation of the protection order.....

1. State the elements of stalking according to the Ohio stalking statute.

2. List all the facts relevant to deciding whether the prosecution proved each of the elements.

3. Assume you’re the prosecutor. Relying on the facts of the case and the reasoning of the trial and the appellate court, argue that Hoying was guilty of stalking.

4. Assume you’re Hoying’s attorney. Relying on the facts of the case and Hoying’s arguments, argue that Hoying wasn’t guilty of stalking.

5. In your opinion, do the facts support a guilty verdict? Was the six-and-one-half-year sentence too harsh? Explain your answers.