D and the victim gave sharply divergent testimony as to what happened at her home. D had driven to the victim's house in the early morning hours but had left when he saw through a window that she was talking on the telephone. D then ran out of gasoline. D came to the door and asked to use the phone. D went into the living room with the victim and watched a video cassette movie she was already playing. The victim testified that D started a struggle with her and forced her against her will to have sexual intercourse with him. D testified that the victim joined him in engaging in foreplay that culminated in consensual sexual intercourse. He recalled that during intercourse she suddenly declared, 'I guess I don't want to do this anymore.' He testified that he thereupon stopped, got dressed, and left. During jury deliberations, the jury was further instructed by the judge that, 'If a couple consensually engages in sexual intercourse and one or the other changes his or her mind and communicates the revocation or change of mind of the consent, and the other partner continues the sexual intercourse by compulsion of the party who changes his or her mind, then it would be rape. The critical element there is the continuation under compulsion.' D was convicted and appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.