People v. Swenson

Defendant was convicted, after bench trial, of disorderly conduct. Defendant had made a lengthy phone call to a private school's director of advancement, and asked numerous questions about school's protocol for handling shootings, and made several disturbing comments about shooting children. A rational trier of fact could have found that Defendant knowingly acted unreasonably and knew or should have known that his act would alarm school administrator so as to breach the peace. Although his speech was not obscene, it was morbid, disturbing, and well beyond a reasonable concern for school security, and thus not protected by the 1st amendment. (McLAREN and JORGENSEN, concurring.)