Under Arkansas Code 5-13-301, terroristic threatening is the crime of threatening violence or property damage against another person with the purpose of terrorizing them. It splits into two degrees. First-degree terroristic threatening is a Class D felony punishable by up to six years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. Second-degree terroristic threatening is a Class A misdemeanor carrying up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $2,500. No physical harm has to occur for either charge to stick.
First Degree vs. Second Degree
The line between the two degrees is drawn by the severity of what was threatened and, in one specific situation, who was threatened.
First-degree terroristic threatening covers threats to cause death, serious physical injury, or substantial property damage to another person. It also covers threats of physical injury or property damage aimed at a teacher or school employee acting in an official capacity, even if the threat itself would otherwise be a misdemeanor-level threat. Either path is a Class D felony.1Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-13-301 – Terroristic Threatening
Second-degree terroristic threatening covers threats of physical injury or property damage that don’t reach the first-degree severity threshold. The intent requirement is the same, but the threatened harm is ordinary rather than serious. This is a Class A misdemeanor.1Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-13-301 – Terroristic Threatening These cases commonly grow out of heated arguments, domestic disputes, or confrontations where someone says something like “I’m going to hurt you” without specifying a level of harm that qualifies as serious.
The Purpose to Terrorize Requirement
Both degrees demand the same mental state: the defendant must have acted “with the purpose of terrorizing another person.”1Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-13-301 – Terroristic Threatening Purpose is the highest level of intent in Arkansas criminal law. It means the defendant’s conscious objective was to make someone afraid. That’s a harder standard for prosecutors than “knowingly” or “recklessly,” and it’s usually where a contested case is won or lost.
Prosecutors don’t have to show the defendant could actually carry out the threat, and they don’t have to show the victim was physically harmed. What they do have to show is that the statement was made and that its point was to terrorize the person receiving it. Text messages, voicemails, social media posts, witness testimony, and the history between the parties all get used to establish that purpose. Courts weigh tone, context, and surrounding circumstances.
Vague or generalized statements are harder to prosecute than direct ones. “I’m going to kill you” sent by text to a named person is far stronger evidence than an ambiguous online rant. Implied threats can still qualify when the context makes the meaning and target clear.
Penalties
Sentencing ranges are set by Arkansas’s general felony and misdemeanor sentencing statutes:
- First degree (Class D felony): up to six years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.2Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-4-401 – Sentence3Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-4-201 – Fines – Limitations on Amount
- Second degree (Class A misdemeanor): up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $2,500.2Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-4-401 – Sentence3Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-4-201 – Fines – Limitations on Amount
Judges have discretion within those ranges. Prior criminal history, severity of the threat, whether it was repeated, and the impact on the victim all push toward the higher end.
Terroristic threatening isn’t on the list of offenses that Arkansas Code 5-4-301 excludes from suspended sentences or probation. That list is limited to capital murder, treason, Class Y felonies, second-degree murder, DWI, and a few others. So a judge can suspend a prison sentence and put a defendant on probation, especially a first-time offender. The one hard exception: a defendant with two or more prior felony convictions cannot receive a suspended sentence or probation.4Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-4-301 – Crimes for Which Suspension or Probation Prohibited
The Mandatory No-Contact Order
The terroristic threatening statute itself forces a no-contact order whenever a defendant is released before trial. It’s not something the judge chooses. Subsection (c) of 5-13-301 requires the court to enter the order in writing, notify the defendant of the penalties for violating it, and send copies to the victim and the arresting agency.1Justia Law. Arkansas Code 5-13-301 – Terroristic Threatening
The order stays in effect through any appeal following conviction. Violating it is a separate offense and can get bail revoked, sending the defendant back into custody. The statute also authorizes the court to order a mental health evaluation if it has reason to believe the defendant’s mental health is or will be an issue.
Firearm Consequences
A first-degree conviction triggers a federal firearms ban. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), anyone convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison cannot possess firearms or ammunition. A Class D felony carries up to six years, so it qualifies.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 922 – Unlawful Acts
A second-degree misdemeanor conviction doesn’t automatically trigger that ban. It can, however, if the threat happened inside a domestic relationship. The Lautenberg Amendment at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) prohibits firearm possession by anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, meaning an offense involving the use or attempted or threatened use of physical force committed by a spouse, former spouse, cohabitant, co-parent, or someone in a similar domestic relationship. There is no carve-out for law enforcement or military personnel.6United States Department of Justice Archives. Restrictions on the Possession of Firearms by Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence
Section 922(g)(8) also bars firearm possession by anyone subject to a qualifying protection order while that order is active.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 922 – Unlawful Acts Because terroristic threatening cases carry mandatory no-contact orders, possessing a firearm during the pendency of the case can create a separate federal exposure on top of the state charge.
Common Defenses
No Purpose to Terrorize
The specific-intent requirement is the most common ground for defense. Statements made in frustration, sarcasm, or the middle of a heated argument may not qualify if they weren’t consciously aimed at making someone afraid. Text threads showing a joking tone, witness testimony about the conversation, or evidence that the statement was plainly hyperbolic can all cast doubt on purpose. The prosecution has to prove that mental state beyond a reasonable doubt.
Identity and Evidence
When a case comes down to one person’s word against another’s, the defense can push on whether the evidence clears the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt bar. Anonymous phone or online threats are especially vulnerable to identity challenges. If prosecutors can’t tie the defendant to the message with digital forensics, IP records, or phone logs, the case can fall apart.
First Amendment and True Threats
The First Amendment doesn’t protect “true threats,” but it limits how loosely states can define them. In Counterman v. Colorado (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the government must show the defendant had some subjective understanding that their statements were threatening. A purely objective test asking only whether a reasonable person would find the words threatening isn’t enough; the constitutional floor is recklessness.7Supreme Court of the United States. Counterman v. Colorado, No. 22-138
Arkansas already requires purpose, which sits above the Counterman floor. But the case still matters because it confirms that context and the speaker’s subjective state of mind are constitutionally required parts of the analysis. Political speech, artistic expression, and rhetorical exaggeration retain strong protection.
When Federal Charges Come In
If a threat crosses state lines, whether by email, phone, or social media, federal prosecutors can charge it under 18 U.S.C. § 875. The penalties are steeper than the state versions:
- Threatening to kidnap or injure a person (no extortion): up to five years in federal prison.8Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 875 – Interstate Communications
- Threatening to kidnap or injure with intent to extort: up to twenty years in federal prison.8Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 875 – Interstate Communications
- Threatening property damage or reputational harm with intent to extort: up to two years in federal prison.8Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 875 – Interstate Communications
Federal prosecutors don’t charge every case they could. Department of Justice guidelines call for a “substantial federal interest,” which is less likely when the state can handle the case effectively.9United States Department of Justice. Principles of Federal Prosecution Federal charges tend to show up when the threat targets a federal official, uses interstate or international communication in a way state prosecution can’t reach, or fits a broader pattern. Because state and federal governments are separate sovereigns, a person can face both sets of charges for the same conduct without double jeopardy problems.
Immigration Consequences
For non-citizens, a terroristic threatening conviction can create real immigration risk. Federal immigration law uses the concept of a “crime involving moral turpitude” (CIMT) to decide whether a conviction makes someone deportable or blocks naturalization. USCIS defines moral turpitude as conduct that is “inherently base, vile, or depraved,” and the assessment turns on the statutory elements, especially whether the offense requires willful, reckless, or malicious intent.10USCIS. Conditional Bars for Acts in Statutory Period
Arkansas’s “purpose of terrorizing” element is the kind of deliberate, malicious mental state that tends to push an offense into CIMT territory. A conviction treated as a CIMT can bar the good-moral-character finding required for naturalization, trigger deportation, and make a non-citizen inadmissible on re-entry. Anyone without U.S. citizenship should have an immigration lawyer involved alongside criminal defense counsel from the start.
Impact on Professional Licensing
A first-degree felony conviction can jeopardize licenses in fields such as healthcare, law, education, and finance. Licensing boards typically weigh the relationship between the offense and the profession, the seriousness of the conduct, evidence of rehabilitation, and time elapsed. Arkansas allows boards to consider the applicant’s age at the time of the offense, work history since conviction, and whether licensure would pose a threat to public safety.
A misdemeanor conviction carries less weight but isn’t harmless, especially in jobs involving vulnerable populations or positions of trust. Background checks routinely surface misdemeanor convictions, and a terroristic threatening conviction of either degree raises questions about temperament that an applicant will have to answer directly.
Sealing a Conviction
Arkansas’s Comprehensive Criminal Record Sealing Act of 2013 covers certain felony and misdemeanor convictions. Non-violent, non-sexual Class D felonies are generally the starting point for felony sealing eligibility, but violent felonies are typically excluded. Whether first-degree terroristic threatening counts as “violent” for sealing purposes can depend on the specific facts and how the conviction is characterized in court records.
Second-degree misdemeanor convictions are more likely to be sealable, though waiting periods apply after sentence completion. Sealing requires filing a petition, and the court has discretion to grant or deny it based on post-conviction conduct. The rules have enough nuance that anyone pursuing this should work with an attorney familiar with Arkansas’s sealing procedures rather than filing alone.