Also known as: sexual assaults · sexually assault · sexually assaulted · sexually assaulting
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A criminal offense consisting of sexual contact with another not the actor's spouse when the actor knows the contact is offensive, knows the other person is incapable of appraising the conduct due to mental disease or defect, or knows the other person is unaware that a sexual act is occurring.
Stephen Shaw stands trial for sexually assaulting a hotel guest. The prosecutor offers testimony from Sydney Santos that Shaw previously trapped her in a service closet and grabbed her without consent. The court admits the evidence because the prior act meets the definition of sexual assault and bears on intent and absence of mistake.
Samantha Stone sues her former supervisor at Sterling Dynamics after he sexually assaulted her during a business trip. She seeks to introduce evidence that the supervisor committed a similar assault on another employee two years earlier. The court permits the evidence because the claim rests on alleged sexual assault and the prior act is relevant under the governing rules.
Stella Shapiro is convicted of sexual assault after forcing sexual contact on an incapacitated coworker. The state charges the offense as her third felony under the three-strikes statute. The court imposes a twenty-five-year term because the current conviction qualifies as a serious felony under the recidivism law.
In 1994 California enacted its three strikes law providing an indeterminate term of 25 years to life for any defendant convicted of a felony who had previously been convicted of two or more serious or violent felonies. On March 12, 2000, Gary Albert Ewing entered the pro shop at the El Segundo Golf Course in Los Angeles County while on parole from a nine-year prison term. He left with three golf clubs priced at $399 each concealed in his pants leg. A shop employee alerted police, and officers apprehended Ewing in the parking lot. Ewing had a long criminal history. In 1984 at age 22 he pleaded guilty to theft and received six months suspended jail time, three years probation, and a fine. Between 1988 and 1993 he accumulated convictions for grand theft auto, petty theft with a prior, battery, burglary, drug paraphernalia possession, unlawful firearm possession, and trespass. In October and November 1993 Ewing committed three residential burglaries and one robbery at a Long Beach apartment complex over five weeks. A jury later convicted him of first-degree robbery and three counts of residential burglary. He received a sentence of nine years and eight months before being paroled in 1999. A jury convicted Ewing of one count of felony grand theft for the golf-club theft. At sentencing the prosecution alleged and the trial court found four prior serious or violent felony convictions arising from the Long Beach crimes. At the sentencing hearing, Ewing asked the court to reduce the grand theft conviction to a misdemeanor or to dismiss some or all of the prior strike allegations. The trial court declined both requests and imposed the mandatory 25-years-to-life term under the three strikes law. The California Court of Appeal affirmed in an unpublished opinion rejecting Ewing's claim that the sentence was grossly disproportionate. The California Supreme Court denied review. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View caseSerena Soto is prosecuted for creating and selling videos that depict sexual assaults. She argues the statute criminalizing such depictions violates the First Amendment. The court rejects the challenge because the material falls outside protected speech when it records actual criminal sexual assaults.
On the evening of April 15, 1989, two white Air Force police officers named Jane Smith and Tony McCormack were walking back to their dormitories at Fort Dix, New Jersey, after seeing a movie. They sat under a glass-enclosed bus shelter to avoid light rain. A black male wearing a wool cap and tan nylon jogging suit entered the shelter, drew a small silver handgun, robbed McCormack of his wallet containing an unsigned $100 money order, and forced Smith to perform fellatio on him while threatening to shoot McCormack. After the assailant fled when a car drove by, the victims contacted military police. Investigator Christine Amos suggested they look at a wanted board containing eight posters with composite sketches and photographs. McCormack immediately identified a photograph of defendant Richard Stevens, and Smith agreed it resembled the attacker though he appeared heavier in the photo. Smith then went to Walson Army Community Hospital where a doctor administered a rape crisis kit and attempted to secure semen samples from her saliva and clothing, producing three glass slides. The FBI laboratory later performed serological testing on one slide containing sufficient semen, which consumed all material on the slide and prevented DNA testing. A consent order had directed the FBI to preserve samples if possible after its own tests so Stevens could conduct DNA testing. The government made remaining materials available to the defense nearly six weeks later, but testing proved inconclusive. Stevens was indicted on charges of aggravated sexual assault and robbery within the special territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Stevens's first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury deadlocked. At the second trial in March 1990, the district court permitted expert testimony on cross-racial identifications, weapon focus, and stress but excluded testimony on the lack of correlation between confidence and accuracy in identifications. The court also excluded testimony from Tyrone Mitchell, who had been robbed at gunpoint three days later at Fort Dix in a similar manner; Mitchell did not identify Stevens, and the fruits of both crimes ended up near Fort Meade, Maryland. The jury convicted Stevens on both counts, and the district court sentenced him to 168 months of incarceration. Stevens appealed, challenging the destruction of the semen sample, the wanted board identification, the admission of pretrial services testimony, the limits on expert testimony, and the exclusion of the Mitchell evidence. The Third Circuit reviewed the record developed at the Wade hearing, the Brady motion hearing, the Downing hearing on expert testimony, and the trial proceedings.
View caseSylvia Santos seeks an abortion after her husband sexually assaults her. State law requires spousal notification but provides an exception when the pregnancy results from reported sexual assault. The clinic proceeds without notification because Sylvia supplies the required certification under the statutory exception.
The Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982, as amended in 1988 and 1989, established several requirements governing the performance of abortions within the Commonwealth. The Act required a woman seeking an abortion to provide informed consent after receiving specific information from a physician or counselor at least twenty-four hours before the procedure. It mandated that a minor obtain the informed consent of one parent, subject to a judicial bypass option. It further required a married woman to sign a statement confirming that she had notified her husband of her planned abortion, unless certain exceptions applied. The Act also imposed reporting obligations on facilities providing abortion services and defined a medical emergency exception to the various requirements. Before any of these provisions took effect, the petitioners brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The petitioners were five abortion clinics and one physician representing himself as well as a class of physicians who provide abortion services. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief and challenged each provision as unconstitutional on its face. The District Court entered a preliminary injunction. After conducting a three-day bench trial, the District Court held all the provisions unconstitutional and entered a permanent injunction against their enforcement by Pennsylvania. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part. It adopted the District Court's factual findings and legal analysis except with respect to the spousal notification requirement. The Court of Appeals upheld the spousal notification requirement as constitutional and applied the undue burden standard in evaluating the provisions. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider the constitutionality of the challenged provisions of the Pennsylvania statute.
View caseSydney Santos is charged with sexual assault. After waiving rights she gives a statement to police describing the offense. The court finds the statement voluntary despite later evidence of mental illness because the waiver was knowing and the conduct described satisfies the elements of the crime.
Brandon Joseph Williams, an Army veteran, was convicted by a jury of murdering Veta Karla Conrad, known as Karla. The jury assessed punishment at sixty-seven years' confinement and a $10,000 fine. Williams timely appealed to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). Karla and her daughter Sarah were living with Williams at the residence of his mother, Belinda Sue Williams, in Lake Jackson, Texas. Karla and Sarah shared Sue's bedroom while Sue slept on the living room couch and Williams had his own bedroom. On the night of the shooting, Williams, who had been using synthetic marijuana and methamphetamine, woke Sue and said he heard something outside. He told her to take Karla and Sarah into the bathroom, but Sue refused to avoid scaring them. Williams went through the kitchen and out the backdoor. Sue rose and saw him standing in the breezeway by the garage. He appeared startled, fell backwards, then raised and pointed his gun at her while advancing and yelling for her to get on the ground. Sue backed up, turned on a lamp, identified herself as his mother, and knelt on one knee. A single bullet from Williams's gun struck Karla, who had entered the room behind Sue. Sue tackled Williams, causing the gun to fly out of his hand, and held him down until police arrived after Sarah called 911. Approximately twelve hours after the shooting and after emergency medical treatment, Williams gave a recorded statement to investigators. In the statement he described seeing a figure, directing it to put its hands up and identify itself, and firing one round. He acknowledged shooting someone and described delusions and fighting with the devil. Williams tested positive for amphetamines and cannabis; the attending emergency room physician noted his heart rate, blood pressure, and respiratory rate were so elevated from the drugs that an abnormally high level of benzodiazepines was required. At trial Sue testified that she believed Williams had been suffering from PTSD or a flashback, though she had been unaware of his recent drug use in the house.
View caseThe actor must know the contact is offensive to the other person, know the other person suffers from a mental disease rendering appraisal impossible, or know the other person is unaware a sexual act is occurring. Knowledge is shown by awareness of the circumstance or that the result is practically certain.
In a criminal case charging sexual assault the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other sexual assault. The evidence is admissible on any relevant matter and is not limited by other rules.
Yes. In a civil case seeking relief based on alleged sexual assault the court may admit evidence that the party committed any other sexual assault. The evidence is considered under the standards of Rules 413 and 414.