People v. Liberta
| Decision Date | 06 March 1984 |
| Citation | 473 N.Y.S.2d 636,100 A.D.2d 741 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Mario LIBERTA, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Rose Sconiers by Barbara Howe, Buffalo, for appellant.
Richard Arcara, Dist. Atty. by Jo Faber, Buffalo, for respondent.
Before DOERR, J.P., and BOOMER, O'DONNELL and SCHNEPP, JJ.
The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of rape in the first degree and sodomy in the first degree committed against his wife. At the time of the rape and sodomy, the defendant and wife were living apart after a "Temporary Order of Protection" had been granted by Family Court. This court has previously determined that the wife falls under the category of "female" in the statute defining sex offenses (Penal Law § 130.00 subd. 4 as amended in 1978; People v. Liberta, 90 A.D.2d 681, 455 N.Y.S.2d 882). Although the statute is gender-based, the lower courts in this state have consistently held that the statute withstands the constitutional challenge (People v. Smith, 97 Misc.2d 115, 411 N.Y.S.2d 146; People v. Fauntleroy, 94 Misc.2d 606, 405 N.Y.S.2d 931 revd in other grds 74 A.D.2d 612, 424 N.Y.S.2d 736; People v. Reilly, 85 Misc.2d 702, 381 N.Y.S.2d 732). "To withstand scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, 'classifications by gender must serve important governmental objectives and must be substantially related to achievement of those objectives' " (Orr v. Orr, 440 U.S. 268, 279, 99 S.Ct. 1102, 1111, 59 L.Ed.2d 306; citing Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 197, 97 S.Ct. 451, 456, 50 L.Ed.2d 397). The classification is rationally related to a legitimate state objective (see People v. Whidden, 51 N.Y.2d 457, 434 N.Y.S.2d 937, 415 N.E.2d 927). Nor is the statute unconstitutional by reason of the marital classification, as long as there is a rational basis for different treatment accorded married and unmarried persons (Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 92 S.Ct. 1029, 31 L.Ed.2d 349). We have examined the other arguments of the defendant and find them without merit.
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Liberta
-
Liberta v. Kelly
...then raped Denise. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department, affirmed Liberta's conviction, People v. Liberta, 100 A.D.2d 741, 473 N.Y.S.2d 636 (1984), and the New York Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal. The Court of Appeals held that both the exempt......
-
Liberta v. Kelly, CIV-85-830C.
...of Protection."1 On appeal, this conviction was affirmed by both the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People v. Liberta, 100 A.D.2d 741, 473 N.Y.S.2d 636 (4th Dept. 1984), and the New York Court of Appeals, People v. Liberta, 64 N.Y.2d 152, 485 N.Y. S.2d 207, 474 N.E.2d 567 In its opi......