Commonwealth v. Leach , 729 A.2d 608 ( 1999 )

HUDOCK, J.,

Concurring and Dissenting.

¶ 1 While I concur with most of the opinion of the majority, I must respectfully dissent from that portion which finds that the first act of criminal mischief constitutes stalking. As the majority notes “The elements of stalking are not established until the occurrence of a second prohibited act...(Majority Opinion at 611-12.) I believe that the first act of vandalism, in itself not sufficient to amount to stalking, cannot rise to stalking because of subsequent events. It is either criminal when it is done or it is not. Subsequent events cannot make criminal an act which is not illegal at the time it is committed.

¶ 2 I would vacate the judgment of sentence arising from the first act of vandalism and affirm the remainder of the sentence.