State v. Bernatchez

Decision Date21 August 1963
Citation193 A.2d 436,159 Me. 384
PartiesSTATE of Maine v. Edmond BERNATCHEZ.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

John Lund, Cty. Atty., Foahd Saliem, Asst. Cty. Atty., Augusta, for State.

Richard J. Dubord, Lawrence D. Ayoob, Waterville, for defendant.

Before WILLIAMSON, C. J., and WEBBER, TAPLEY, SULLIVAN, SIDDALL and MARDEN, JJ.

MARDEN, Justice.

On appeal. The respondent was found guilty of rape and appeals from the denial of a motion for a new trial.

Respondent saved two exceptions during the trial, which exceptions are expressly waived.

The issue before us is whether in view of the record, the jury was justified in believing beyond a reasonable doubt that the respondent was guilty. State v. Dipietrantonio, 152 Me. 41, 54, 122 A.2d 414,--of carnal knowledge of the prosecutrix, by force and against her will. Carnal knowledge is synonymous with sexual intercourse, 44 Am.Jur., Rape § 2, and, by definition, sexual intercourse, as an element of rape, requires penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ. 44 Am.Jur., supra § 3.

A detailed statement of the facts will serve no purpose. The complainant and her husband and the respondent and his wife were social friends, and all residents of Oakland. Complainant's husband was absent in the military service. The incident with which we are concerned occurred in the early morning of September 19th. On September 18th, following work, the respondent went to Waterville with male friends and had 'some beers'. His wife was working 6:00 p. m. to 12:00 midnight on that date. About midnight respondent started toward home, but continued on past his street of residence and at about 1:00 a. m. arrived at the home of complainant's grandmother, with whom prosecutrix lived, and upon his false representation that his, respondent's, wife was ill and needed the complainant, complainant dressed and joined the respondent in his car. Respondent operated the car with complainant as passenger in a direction other than that in which he lived, giving reasons therefor which complainant accepted, and shortly parked at a spot on the outskirts of the residental area of the town, where the alleged assault occurred. The physical aggression on the part of the respondent and resistance by the complainant occupied a substantial period of time. The verbal remonstrances of the complainant were consistent with the situation in which she found herself and the respondent's replies were not inconsistent with a person affected by the use of alcohol, and intent upon sexual intercourse. Following the incident respondent drove complainant back to her residence. She...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Rundlett
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • September 20, 1978
    ...term, this court has defined carnal knowledge as "penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ." 7 State v. Bernatchez, 159 Me. 384, 385, 193 A.2d 436, 437 (1963); see also Wilson v. State, Me., 268 A.2d 484, 487 (1970). Furthermore, since the statute expressly designates as po......
  • Rundlett v. Oliver, No. 79-1044
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • August 1, 1979
    ...with sexual intercourse, which has been defined as "penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ". State v. Bernatchez, 159 Me. 384, 385, 193 A.2d 436, 437 (1963); State v. Croteau, 158 Me. 360, 362, 184 A.2d 683, 684 (1962). The evidence presented at appellant's jury trial in ......
  • State v. Davis
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • May 23, 1967
    ...84 A.L.R.2d 1017, 1019. It is well established that an essential element of the crime of rape is sexual penetration. State v. Bernatchez, 159 Me. 384, 385, 193 A.2d 436; Edmondson v. State, 230 Md. 66, 67, 185 A.2d 497; Perkins, Criminal Law, p. 114. From the fact that the Trial Court did n......
  • State v. McFarland
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • February 8, 1977
    ...435, 193 A.2d 914, 916 (1963); State v. Bennett, 158 Me. 109, 111, 179 A.2d 812, 814 (1962). As we stated in State v. Bernatchez, 159 Me. 384, 386, 193 A.2d 436, 438 (1963): 'It was the jury's responsibility to decide to what extent, if any, her (the prosecutrix') testimony and any pre-tria......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT