Legal Opinion

State v. Routh

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 12, 1977No. Cr 76-110, CA 7641; Cr 76-111, CA 7642PublishedCited by 12 opinions

petition for review pending

1Opinion of the CourtSchwab, C. J.

Defendants’ joint jury trial resulted in convictions for first-degree rape.

The indictments alleged defendants "* * * did unlawfully and knowingly, by forcible compulsion, engage in sexual intercourse with [the victim], a female * * Defendants demurred on the ground that the indictments do not allege they are males.

The rape statutes repeatedly use the term "male.” ORS 163.355 to 163.375. However, the gender of the defendant is not an element of the offense because a woman could be liable as an accessory. Proposed Oregon Criminal Code 113, Commentary (1970). And even if gender were an element…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Patterson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
  2. State v. JimCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
  3. People v. MiloneAppellate Court of Illinois · 1976
  4. State v. KeysCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  5. State v. LamphereOregon Supreme Court · 1963

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Howard v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Kennedy v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1982
  3. State v. PeoplesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1980
  4. State v. SagerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
  5. State v. ArmstrongWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1988

7 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