People v. Worrell
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKavanagh, J.
The dissent in this case, as the decision of the Court of Appeals, is based on the premise that a charge of statutory rape or criminal sexual conduct is made out by evidence of penetration of a female under the statutory age without regard to her consent. This is not disputed. The law traditionally has held that the consent of a person of such tender years to such acts will not be recognized and accordingly that consent is no defense to such a charge.
Likewise, consent is no defense to a charge of attempt to effect such sexual penetration.
However, proof of penetration or attempt to penetrate…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. McDonaldMichigan Supreme Court · 1861
- People v. CourierMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- People v. CarlsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. LuethMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
- Linebaugh v. BerdishMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
- People v. StarksMichigan Supreme Court · 2005
- People v. HendricksMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
- People v. ReevesMichigan Supreme Court · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.