Chad M. Seibel
Criminal Defense
407.846.8008
Stalking & Cyberstalking Defense
Stalking is the criminal charge that lives closest to ordinary life: breakups, custody wars, neighbor feuds, and group-chat drama all generate accusations that someone “won't stop.” Florida's statute is broad — it covers following, harassing, and cyberstalking, which includes not just messages but accessing someone's online accounts or home smart-devices without permission. Broad statutes invite broad charging, and these cases are regularly filed on conduct that the law, read carefully, does not criminalize.
If you've been charged — or warned by a detective to “stop contacting” someone — the next message you don't send matters. Call or text 407-846-8008.
The Charges Under § 784.048
• Stalking: willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly following, harassing, or cyberstalking another person. First-degree misdemeanor — up to 1 year.
• Aggravated stalking — third-degree felony (up to 5 years) when any of these is added:
• a credible threat placing the person in reasonable fear for their safety or their family's;
• stalking after an injunction or no-contact order protecting the victim;
• a victim under 16;
• stalking a victim after sentencing in certain sex-offense cases.
• Judges can also impose no-contact orders up to 10 years at sentencing, and a stalking arrest frequently arrives alongside a civil stalking injunction petition — a separate case with its own hearing and lifetime record (see Injunction Defense).
What the State Must Actually Prove
The statute's definitions are the defense:
• “Harass” requires a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress and serves no legitimate purpose. Each element has teeth: a handful of texts in a live dispute, contact about shared children, attempts to retrieve property, or communications about a genuine business disagreement all have legitimate purposes — and courts have reversed convictions and dissolved injunctions on exactly that ground.
• “Repeatedly” means a series of acts showing continuity of purpose — not one ugly message, not two calls in one night.
• Substantial emotional distress is measured by a reasonable-person standard, not the accuser's say-so.
• Constitutionally protected activity is expressly excluded — and a credible threat must be more than hyperbole, rudeness, or venting.
• In cyberstalking cases, the State also faces identity and attribution problems: shared accounts, spoofing, mutual block-evasion games, and group pile-ons rarely map cleanly onto one defendant's “course of conduct.”
Context may decide these cases. The accuser's own messages — invitations, responses, provocations — the full thread rather than the screenshots, and the timeline of who contacted whom routinely tell a two-way story the probable cause affidavit left out.
The Felony Trap: Contact After an Injunction
Once any injunction or no-contact order exists, a single alleged contact can be charged as felony aggravated stalking — including indirect contact through friends, tags, likes, or “accidental” run-ins the accuser documents. If you are under any order: total silence, total distance, everything through counsel. The order is the whole game, and violating it hands the State a felony it otherwise couldn't prove.
Frequently Asked Questions
She texts me constantly, then screenshots my replies for the police.
Mutual contact is the classic defense fact-pattern — and the full thread is discoverable. Stop replying today; preserve everything; let the records speak.
Is checking someone's public social media stalking?
Viewing public posts isn't a course of conduct directed at the person. Logging into their accounts, tracking their devices, or flooding them with messages is different — the line is real, and we hold the State to it.
I was just trying to get my belongings back after the breakup.
Property retrieval is a legitimate purpose — which defeats the harassment definition. It's also a task better routed through counsel than through midnight texts.
Can these charges be dropped before trial?
Often they can — through motions attacking the course-of-conduct and legitimate-purpose elements, and through negotiated outcomes when the State's full-thread evidence underwhelms. Early counsel shapes the filing decision itself.
Say Nothing Else — To Anyone — Until We Talk
Call or text 407-846-8008 for a free, confidential consultation with former prosecutor Chad Seibel.
Attorney Chad M. Seibel, Of Counsel at Perez LaSure Law. Office in Kissimmee. Consultations and meetings available throughout Florida by appointment. Hablamos español. Atendemos em Português.