Commonwealth v. Berkowitz case brief summary
415 Pa. Super. 505
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendant appealed from judgment of sentence imposed following convictions of rape and indecent assault in the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, Criminal (Pennsylvania).
OVERVIEW: Defendant was convicted of rape and indecent assault and sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment of one to four years on the rape and a concurrent term of six to twelve months for indecent assault.
HOLDING:
The court reversed defendant's conviction for rape because it found that the incident between defendant and victim did not meet the statutory definition of rape, 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 3121.
ANALYSIS:
-Specifically, the court found that even in the light most favorable to the commonwealth, the victim's testimony as to the physical aspects of the encounter could not serve as a basis to prove "forcible compulsion."
-No evidence was adduced which established that mental coercion, or a threat, or force inherently inconsistent with consensual intercourse was used to complete the act of intercourse.
-The court further found that a new trial was warranted on the indecent assault charge because the trial court erroneously applied the Rape Shield Law to exclude evidence which tended to show that the charges may have been fabricated, thus the evidence should have been deemed relevant.
OUTCOME: The court discharged defendant on the rape conviction because it found that the commonwealth did not establish that mental coercion, or a threat, or force inherently inconsistent with consensual intercourse was used to complete the act of intercourse. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial on the indecent assault conviction because it determined that the exclusion of evidence of victim's motive to fabricate the charge was improper.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
415 Pa. Super. 505
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendant appealed from judgment of sentence imposed following convictions of rape and indecent assault in the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, Criminal (Pennsylvania).
OVERVIEW: Defendant was convicted of rape and indecent assault and sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment of one to four years on the rape and a concurrent term of six to twelve months for indecent assault.
HOLDING:
The court reversed defendant's conviction for rape because it found that the incident between defendant and victim did not meet the statutory definition of rape, 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 3121.
ANALYSIS:
-Specifically, the court found that even in the light most favorable to the commonwealth, the victim's testimony as to the physical aspects of the encounter could not serve as a basis to prove "forcible compulsion."
-No evidence was adduced which established that mental coercion, or a threat, or force inherently inconsistent with consensual intercourse was used to complete the act of intercourse.
-The court further found that a new trial was warranted on the indecent assault charge because the trial court erroneously applied the Rape Shield Law to exclude evidence which tended to show that the charges may have been fabricated, thus the evidence should have been deemed relevant.
OUTCOME: The court discharged defendant on the rape conviction because it found that the commonwealth did not establish that mental coercion, or a threat, or force inherently inconsistent with consensual intercourse was used to complete the act of intercourse. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial on the indecent assault conviction because it determined that the exclusion of evidence of victim's motive to fabricate the charge was improper.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment