State v. Martinez

52 P.3d 1276 (2002)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was nineteen years old when he had sexual intercourse with a fifteen-year-old girl. Before trial, D filed a motion in limine to determine whether he could submit evidence in support of an affirmative defense that the victim represented herself to be seventeen years old at the time of the sexual intercourse. D argued that section 76-5-401 does not impose strict liability and that he should therefore be allowed to present evidence that he did not know the victim's age. In the alternative, D argued that if the statute does impose strict liability, it violates federal and state due process requirements. D's motion was denied. They also determined that the law does not violate due process under either the State or the federal constitution. D entered a conditional guilty plea to unlawful sexual intercourse, subject to an appeal of the trial court's denial of D's pre-trial motion. The court of appeals held that: (1) the legislature clearly intended a violation to be a strict liability crime and expressly precluded the defense of mistake as to the victim's age; and (2) D's federal due process rights were not been violated because the statutory scheme reflects careful consideration of protection for minors and rationally furthers a legitimate governmental interest. D appealed.