Legal Opinion

Shand v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 7, 1996No. 57, Sept. Term, 1995PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RODOWSKY, Judge.

We granted certiorari in this rape prosecution in order to review an interpretation of the rape shield statute, Md.Code (1957, 1992 Repl.Vol.), Art. 27, § 461A (the Statute), that was placed upon it in Shand v. State, 103 Md.App. 465, 653 A.2d 1000 (1995). 1 The Court of Special Appeals held “that ‘sexual conduct,’ as that term is used in [the Statute], requires physical contact indicating a willingness to engage in either vaginal intercourse or a sexual act.” Id. at 480-81, 653 A.2d at 1007-08 (footnotes omitted). As explained below, we shall hold that “sexual conduct” is not…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. White v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
  2. Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Kvasnikoff v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1983
  4. People v. CasasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  5. Lucado v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1978

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ParentMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013
  2. Pettit v. Erie Insurance ExchangeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  3. Rieger v. ArnoldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  4. Barrios v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. State v. MemoliSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API