Commonwealth v. Balthazar
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.
' The defendant was convicted of committing an “unnatural and lascivious act with another person.” See G. L. c. 272, § 35. He argues that the prohibition against committing an “unnatural and lascivious act” is unconstitutionally vague. He further asserts that § 35 is unconstitutional because it impermissibly attempts to apply to conduct of consenting adults in private. He argues that the judge should have instructed the jury that consent by the victim would bar a conviction under § 35. He also claims that, if § 35 is free from unconstitutional vagueness, the judge failed to give the jury an…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Stanley v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by89 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HeinbaughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Goodridge v. Department of Public HealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
- Commonwealth v. ApplebyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Commonwealth v. GallantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Green v. RichmondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.