Case Brief

1. HaroldSowardsII
CJ 322, Tu/Th 9:30
11/2/15
State in the Interest of M.T.S.
609 A.2d 1266 (NJ 1992)
1. Facts
 Monday,May 21, 1990 C.G. wentupstairsat11:30 pm afterwatchingtv wearingher
underpants,bra,shirtandshorts
 M.T.S. saidhe was goingto make surprise visitsuptoherbedroomat least3-4 times
that day butshe disregardedthisbecause he frequentlyteasedher
 Attemptedtokisshernumeroustimesandattemptedtoputhishanddownherpants at
leastonce,which wasrejected
 At 1:30 am the nextday,she wenttothe bathroomandsaw M.T.S. standingthere.He
entersherbedroomwhile she isinthe bathroom
 Upon returning,theybeginkissingandundressingeachother,starttoengage insex.
After3 thrusts,he triesfora 4th
but getssmackedinthe face
 There wasno screamingor cryingout at all,howevershe didcryafterhe left
 At 7 am C.G.tellshermomwhat happened
 May 23, 1990 M.T.S. is chargedwith2nd
degree sexual assaultviolatingN.J.SA2C:142C
(1)
 Two daytrial,M.T.S. was adjudicateddelinquentcourtfindsthatthe victimconsented
to heavypettingandkissingsession,she wasn’tsleepingatthe time of penetration,but
she didn’tconsent
 Appeals,reversed
 NJSupreme Courtgrantedstate’spetitionforcertificationtoreview the law regarding
the elementof force inrape
 Reversedthe appellate courtdecision,reinstatesthe juvenile delinquencycharge
2. Issue
Didthe elementof “physical force”getmetsimplybyanact of nonconsensual penetration
involvingnomore force thannecessarytoaccomplishthisresult?
3. Holdings
Yes,reversed
4. Reasoning
Thisis whatis knownas“acquaintance rape”.In 1978, NJ Code of CJ reformedthe law of rape.It
doesn’trefertoforce inrelationtoovercomingthe will of the victim, overpoweringor
submissionof the victim.Itdoesn’trequire the demonstratednon-consentof the victim.It
placesprimaryemphasisonthe assaultivenature of the crime.Inconclusion,anyactof sexual

2. penetrationengagedwithoutaffirmativeandfreelygivenpermissionof the victimconstitutes
the offense of sexual assault.