Kinslow v. State

Summary

The Court reversed Kinslow’s conviction for computer trespass because the State failed to prove that his unauthorized forwarding of copied emails hindered the use of data. Applying contextual statutory canons, the Court construed “interfering” in the relevant provision to require disruption akin to hindering, obstructing, or interrupting, and found only that Kinslow added another recipient while the intended recipient continued receiving the emails.