People v. Mangano

In People v Mangano (100 N.Y.2d 569 [2003]), the defendant called an after-hours telephone answering machine maintained by the Village of Ossining, and "rained invective on two village employees, wished them and their families ill health, and complained of their job performance." (100 N.Y.2d at 570.) The Court of Appeals reversed her conviction for violating section 240.30 (1), stating "defendant's messages were crude and offensive but made in the context of complaining about government actions, on a telephone answering machine set up for the purpose (among others) of receiving complaints from the public. We cannot agree with the People's argument that appellant's messages fall within any of the proscribable classes of speech or conduct." (100 N.Y.2d at 571.) The Court held the statute unconstitutional as applied to a defendant who left five invective-filled messages on a town hall telephone answering machine. In dicta, the court added "We cannot agree with the People's argument that appellant's messages fall within any of the proscribable classes of speech or conduct." Id., at 571.