People v. Copp
Rochester City Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Melchor E. Castro, J.
The defendant is charged with the crime of sexual misconduct, second degree. In this motion, he challenges the facial sufficiency of the accusatory instrument. The question presented to the court is whether natural, uninduced sleep constitutes being in a physically helpless condition from which one may be deemed incapable of consenting to deviate sexual intercourse. The information alleges that the complainant was asleep in the defendant’s apartment, when he awoke to realize that the defendant had inserted his penis in the complainant’s anus.
To be…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. AlejandroNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. TeicherNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. GriffithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- People v. IrvingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- People v. ThiessenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. SensourichanhAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- State v. StevensMontana Supreme Court · 2002
- People v. Frisbee, New York County Courts2004
- State v. StevensMontana Supreme Court · 2002