Warren V. State Case For Recit

WARREN V. STATE 9.
Court upholds jury decision of Warren’s guilt of rape and

aggravated sodomy.
Case Summary for Recit
1. Appellant Daniel Steven Warren was convicted of rape and
aggravated sodomy against his wife by Fulton County Jury
2. He asserts that it is legally impossible for a husband to rape his Facts

wife
- The appellant, Daniel Steven Warren, was indicted by a
3. Basis of his argument: that there is an implicit marital exclusion Fulton County Grand Jury for the rape and aggravated
within the rape statute sodomy of his wife
- He appellant asserts that there exists within the rape statute
4. So question is: Is rape legally impossible between married parties?
an implicit marital exclusion that makes it legally impossible
5. Court: No, it is legally possible. Such notion of legally impossible for a husband to be guilty of raping his wife
rape within a marriage is archaic and indicative of a time when - Until the late 1970s, there was no real examination of this
women were treated as mere property or chattel (Chattel Theory) belief. Within the last few years, several jurisdictions have
(what the f?) been faced with similar issues. It was held that in some
cases, a husband can be held criminally liable for raping his
Implied Consent Theory: that with the consent to marriage, a wife wife
has implied given up herself to her husband in this kind → a husband
cannot be guilty of raping his wife Issue:
6. State cannot sanction such belief so violative of human rights: due Does the existence of marriage between parties excuse the crime
process and equal protection of rape?
7. State would not sanction such behavior by adding an implied Held/Ratio

consent term to all marriage contracts that would leave all wives
with no protection under the law from the "ultimate violation of 1. The argument is based on Lord Hale’s contractual theory, but
self,” simply because they choose to enter into a relationship that such is a product of archaic traditional views and is bereft of
is respected and protected by the law. legal basis.
o Implied consent theory: "but a husband cannot be
8. U.S. SPECIFIC: There never has been an expressly stated marital
guilty of a rape committed by himself upon his lawful
exemption included in the Georgia rape statute
wife, for by their mutual matrimonial consent and
A reading of the statute indicates that there is no marital contract the wife hath given up herself in this kind
exclusion. "A person commits the offense of rape when he has unto her husband which she cannot retreat."
carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will." ● Marriage Doctrine of English law:
marriage to the perpetrator absolves
him of rape charges → relationship ▪ A husband can rape his wife because she is
bet marital relationship and immunity his chattel (WTF)
▪ 3 theories on women with respect to marriage ▪ Even in the era of slavery, the definition of
▪ Hale's implied consent theory was created at rape was defined as "the carnal knowledge of
a time when marriages were irrevocable and a female whether free or slave, forcibly and
when all wives promised to "love, honor, and against her will”
obey" and all husbands promised to "love, ▪ Both the chattel and unity of identity rationales
cherish, and protect until death do us part." have been cast aside. Women are no longer
Wives were subservient to their husbands, her considered chattel
identity was merged into his, her property o There never has been an expressly stated marital
became his property, and she took his name exemption included in the Georgia rape statute
for her own. ▪ A reading of the statute indicates that there is
▪ No legal basis no marital exclusion. "A person commits the
o The state would not sanction such behavior that goes offense of rape when he has carnal
against human rights, due process and equal knowledge of a female forcibly and against
protection her will."
▪ Changes in women’s rights→ Due process 2. The appellant contends that there is an implicit marital
and equal protection: protection of the person, exclusion within the aggravated sodomy statute that makes it
her liberty and security are paramount legally impossible for a husband to be guilty of an offense of
▪ Rape "is highly reprehensible, both in a moral aggravated sodomy performed upon his wife.
sense and in its almost total contempt for the o Sodomy: the carnal knowledge and connection
personal integrity and autonomy of the female against the order of nature by man with man, or in the
victim… Short of homicide, it is the ultimate same unnatural manner with woman.
violation of self o Regardless of marital relations, consent (whether
● state would not sanction such express or iplied) is NOT a defense in sodomy →
behavior by adding an implied consent lack of consent was not an element of the offense
term to all marriage contracts that o An allegation of consent would only go to show the
would leave all wives with no other party's guilt
protection under the law from the o Sodomy statute was repealed: introduce sodomy and
"ultimate violation of self,” simply aggravated sodomy
because they choose to enter into a ▪ There can be no common law marital
relationship that is respected and exemption under the aggravated sodomy
protected by the law statute based on "implied consent," when the
o Argument based on chattel theory is also untenable. statute was enacted in 1968 and when there
clearly was no marital exemption for sodomy
based on marital consent
3. The appellant contends that the new interpretation (striking
down marital exemptions) would deprive him of his due
process right
o All the Due Process Clause requires is that the law
give sufficient warning that men may conduct
themselves so as to avoid that which is forbidden
o Both the rape and aggravated sodomy statutes are
broadly written, and they are unambiguous.

Warren V. State Case For Recit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Warren V. State Case For Recit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Warren V. State Case For Recit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WARREN V. STATE 9.

Court upholds jury decision of Warren’s guilt of rape and

2. He asserts that it is legally impossible for a husband to rape his Facts

7. State would not sanction such behavior by adding an implied Held/Ratio

You might also like