Pennsylvania Superior Court Upholds Harassment Conviction in Commonwealth v. Tyreece Miyares (2024 PA Super 166)

Commonwealth v. Tyreece Miyares, 2024 PA Super 166

The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently affirmed the harassment conviction of Tyreece Miyares, upholding the decision of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas. The case, Commonwealth v. Tyreece Miyares, 2024 PA Super 166, involved repeated incidents where Miyares directed hostile gestures and derogatory language toward his next-door neighbors, a same-sex couple, leading to his conviction under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2709(a)(4)—harassment by communication of lewd, lascivious, threatening, or obscene language.

Facts of the Case

Miyares resided next to two men in Pittsburgh’s Brighton Heights neighborhood. The victims installed security cameras after one of them was assaulted by a guest from Miyares’ residence. Shortly thereafter, between August 25, 2022, and September 16, 2022, Miyares engaged in a series of nine incidents in which he approached their residence, looked directly into their security camera, and flipped his middle finger.

On August 27, 2022, Miyares escalated his behavior by adding a homophobic slur, shouting “gay bitch” at the camera. The victims reported feeling unsafe and harassed, leading them to file a complaint with the Pittsburgh Police on September 16, 2022.

After an investigation, law enforcement filed two counts of harassment against Miyares on September 24, 2022, under Section 2709(a)(4). The charges were based on his repeated gestures and verbal remarks intended to alarm, annoy, or threaten the victims.

Trial Court Proceedings

The case proceeded to a bench trial on April 18, 2023, where both the victims and Miyares testified. The prosecution introduced video evidence from the victims' security cameras documenting all nine instances of harassment. The victims testified that they felt targeted and emotionally distressed by Miyares’ repeated conduct.

The trial court found Miyares guilty on both counts of harassment and sentenced him to six months of non-reporting probation.

Miyares’ Appeal

Miyares appealed the conviction, arguing that his conduct—flipping off a camera and shouting an insult—was protected under the First Amendment and did not meet the legal definition of "lewd, lascivious, threatening, or obscene" communication under Pennsylvania’s harassment statute.

He contended that while his actions were "rude and insulting," they did not constitute “fighting words” or pose an immediate threat of violence. He also asserted that the trial court improperly applied a "course of conduct" standard from another subsection of the harassment statute, which was not charged against him.

Superior Court’s Decision

The Pennsylvania Superior Court, in an opinion authored by Judge Olson, rejected Miyares’ arguments and upheld the harassment convictions.

The court emphasized that:

1. Nonverbal Gestures as Communication:

   • The flipping of the middle finger is a form of communication under Pennsylvania law, specifically under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2709(f).

   • The trial court properly found that Miyares’ repeated and targeted use of this gesture was intended to harass and intimidate the victims.

2. Use of a Homophobic Slur as Fighting Words:

   • The phrase “gay bitch”, when directed at the victims, constituted fighting words—a category of speech that falls outside First Amendment protection.

   • The court equated the term to racial slurs, emphasizing that it was personally abusive and likely to provoke a violent response.

3. Course of Conduct Supporting Intent to Harass:

   • The court rejected Miyares’ claim that the trial court improperly applied a course of conduct standard.

   • While Miyares was not charged under the subsection for course of conduct harassment, the repeated nature of his actions demonstrated a specific intent to harass.

   • The Superior Court found that nine incidents over three weeks could not be dismissed as mere isolated expressions of free speech.

4. Victims’ Fear and Emotional Distress:

   • The trial judge credited the victims’ testimony, which described a pattern of harassment that made them feel unwelcome and unsafe in their own home.

   • The court emphasized that a reasonable person in the victims' position would feel threatened and alarmed.

Key Takeaways

This decision highlights that repeated and targeted expressions of hostility—especially those directed toward a protected class—can constitute criminal harassment under Pennsylvania law. The ruling reinforces:

• Nonverbal gestures, such as the middle finger, can qualify as harassment if used in a targeted and threatening manner.

• Hate speech, particularly slurs directed at individuals based on their identity, can be classified as “fighting words” and lose First Amendment protection.

• A pattern of repeated behavior strengthens an intent-to-harass finding, even when each individual act might seem minor in isolation.

Ultimately, Commonwealth v. Miyares sets a precedent affirming that deliberate acts of intimidation and hostility—especially those involving discriminatory slurs—can result in criminal convictions, even if they involve non-physical actions.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Tyreece Miyares serves as a cautionary tale for individuals who believe that repeated verbal harassment and obscene gestures are protected speech. While freedom of expression is a fundamental right, it does not extend to targeted harassment designed to intimidate or threaten others.

The affirmation of Miyares’ harassment conviction underscores the importance of accountability for actions that create a hostile environment, particularly when they are motivated by bias against a person’s identity.

For those facing similar charges or seeking legal counsel regarding harassment laws in Pennsylvania, experienced defense representation is crucial.

Need Legal Representation? Contact The Town Law LLC

At The Town Law LLC, our team of Philadelphia criminal defense attorneys has extensive experience defending individuals charged with harassment, disorderly conduct, and other criminal offenses. If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges in Pennsylvania, contact us today for a free consultation to discuss your legal options.