Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Inga v. State

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided March 1, 2019No. 2638 A-12067Published

1Concurrence

Judge MANNHEIMER, concurring.

*352I write separately to describe the historical background of our current sexual assault statutes, particularly with regard to the element of "without consent", and also to describe how other states have interpreted the requirement of coercion. I then apply Alaska's law of coercion to the facts of Inga's case.

The historical background of our sexual assault statutes and the element of "without consent"

For purposes of Alaska's sexual assault statutes, the phrase "without consent" has a special meaning that differs significantly from its everyday meaning. Under AS…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Johnson v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1988
  2. State v. MarshallOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State v. SchenckSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1987
  4. Iyapana v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2012
  5. Chatham v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2006

5 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