People v. Barnes

Facts

Marsha had known D about four years. They were neighbors and acquaintances. She had been to his house briefly once before to buy some marijuana. A couple of weeks before they had drunk wine together at her house. D called Marsha and invited her over for some drinks. She did not commit, and D called twice to see what Marsha had decided to do. She finally said she wanted to buy a little marijuana from him. She asked him to meet her outside his house. D suggested they go inside and smoke some marijuana. D eventually persuaded her to come inside. They both smoked and D offered some cocaine, but she refused. She kept telling appellant she wanted to hurry up and leave. After 10 or 15 minutes, D began to hug Marsha. She pushed him away and told him to stop. She did not take him seriously as he was 'just coming on.' She just wanted him to give her the marijuana and let her go since she had to get up early in the morning. Marsha finally said goodbye and walked out of the room. As she approached the front gate, D began 'ranting and raving' and arguing with her. Marsha characterized D's behavior as 'psychotic.' She asked appellant to open it, but he just stood looking at her. When she asked appellant what was wrong, he 'reared back' as if he were going to hit her. They argued at the gate for about 20 minutes. Marsha then followed D returned to the room because she felt she could not get out the front gate by herself. All the while D continued ranting and raving. Several times, D stopped talking and looked at her 'funny.' D then grabbed her by her sweater collar and told her he could pick her up with one hand and throw her out. D also told Marsha of his past sexual exploits. Eventually, after further bizarre behavior, Marsha asked D whether he wanted to hit her. Approximately 40 minutes had elapsed since they entered the room a second time. Marsha began to 'play along' and feign compliance with D's desires. She suggested they go to her house where they could be alone. D continued to hug and talk to her. D then told Marsha to remove her clothes. Marsha refused. D reacted by telling her she was going to upset him. Marsha removed her clothes. An act of sexual intercourse ensued which lasted about one hour and included the exchange of kisses. D and Marsha fell asleep. Marsha testified that if she refused sex, she feared D would become physically violent. She awoke around 4 a.m. She cajoled D into walking her to the front gate and opening it so she could leave. She returned home and immediately called Kaiser Hospital to request an examination. She was eventually referred to the sexual trauma center and examined for venereal disease. After discussing the incident with a coworker, she reported it to the police the following day. D's defense was consent. According to D, it was Marsha who first returned to the room. There, she told him she would stay a little while longer. Then, without being asked, she started removing her clothes. Consensual sexual intercourse ensued, and Marsha returned appellant's hugs and kisses. D testified he did not threaten Marsha in any way, make gestures toward her, display his muscles or force her to stay. He confirmed the fact that he had telephoned Marsha twice afterward. However, he testified they talked briefly each time. D was convicted. The decision was reversed by a court of appeals as it was unsupported with substantial evidence. The California supreme court granted review. 

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.