People v. Chandler
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of attempted criminal threat. Defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that the crime of attempted criminal threat requires a finding that the intended threat reasonably could have caused sustained fear under the circumstances. The court of appeals affirmed the convictions, concluding that an attempted criminal threat does not require such a reasonableness element. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) a defendant who utters words to a victim with a subjective intent to threaten may only be convicted of the crime of attempted criminal threat if there is sufficient proof that the intended threat under the circumstances was sufficient to cause a reasonable person to be in sustained fear; and (2) Defendant’s threats under the circumstances were sufficient to cause a reasonable person to be in sustained fear.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.