Interesting line from a California state court criminal law decision handed down today: “it makes no difference that the charged conduct took place in cyberspace rather than real space.”
The case, Hageseth v. Superior Court, involved a Colorado doctor who participated in an online pharmacy. The doctor, Hageseth, issued an online prescription to a patient in California, and was then charged criminally with practicing medicine without a license in California. Hageseth claimed that he couldn’t be charged with a California crime because he was beyond California’s jurisdiction, bolstered at least in part by what looks like a dormant-commerce-clause-argument-in-disguise: specifically, that it would create all sorts of trouble for California to try to regulate such conduct beyond its borders.
The court disagreed, finding that under traditional principles of extraterritorial application of criminal law the state of California could reach the doctor’s conduct. The fact that the doctor’s conduct took place “in cyberspace” — that is, using e-mail and websites — was irrelevant. Next time maybe the defendant should argue that if you commit a crime in cyberspace rather than real space, you only have to go to cyber jail instead of real jail.
Thanks to Tom Watson for the link.