State v. Pratt
Citation | 151 Me. 236,116 A.2d 924 |
Parties | STATE of Maine v. Warren PRATT. |
Decision Date | 19 September 1955 |
Court | Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US) |
Frederic S. Sturgis, County Atty., Arthur A. Peabody, Asst. County Atty., Portland, for plaintiff.
I. Edward Cohen, Portland, for defendant.
Before FELLOWS, C. J., and WILLIAMSON, WEBBER, BELIVEAU and THAXTER, JJ.
In an indictment in proper form the State alleged that the respondent 'did then and there commit the crime against nature with mankind, to wit, did feloniously cause and entice a certain female, to wit, one (naming her) to perform the act of manual manipulation upon the sexual parts of him, the said Warren Pratt, against the order of nature,' etc. Respondent seasonably demurred. The presiding Justice overruled the demurrer, expressly citing in support of that action State v. Townsend, 145 Me. 384, 71 A.2d 517. Respondent's exceptions test that action.
The indictment does not set forth the age of the alleged victim. We gather from the oral argument of respondent's counsel that he does not press his argument that that omission is fatal to the indictment. The argument, even though pressed, would not avail. Where the crime against nature is charged, the age of the victim or pathic is not material and there is no requirement that it be alleged.
R.S.1954, Chap. 134, Sec. 3 provides, 'Whoever commits the crime against nature, with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished * * *.' The Statute is silent as to the particular acts which are thereby forbidden. It has always been recognized that when a statute defines an offense in the generic terms of the common law, without more particular definition, courts must resort to the common law to ascertain the particular acts which may constitute the crime. Very divergent views have resulted when the courts of many jurisdictions have attempted to apply this test to 'the crime against nature'. Our Court has consistently interpreted this statute as being very broad in its scope. It was held to include penetration per os (fellatio) in State v. Cyr, 135 Me. 513, 198 A. 743; and likewise in State v. Townsend, supra, to include the equally base and degraded acts which constitute what is known in medical jurisprudence as cunnilingus. The Legislature has not seen fit to amend the act since these decisions were rendered and may be deemed to have accorded tacit approval to that breadth of definition. But it does not follow that every act of sexual perversion is encompassed within the definition of 'the crime...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re J.D., COA 18-1036
...that "evidence of condition, position, and proximity of the parties ... may afford sufficient evidence of penetration"); State v. Pratt , 151 Me. 236, 116 A.2d 924, 925 (1955) (holding that "the fact of penetration may be proved by circumstantial evidence as by the position of the parties a......
-
State v. Whittemore
...... * * * The crime against nature involving mankind is not complete without some penetration, however slight, of a natural orifice of the body. The penetration need not be to any particular distance.' State v. Pratt, 151 Me. 236, 116 A.2d 924, 925; State v. Hill, 179 Miss. 732, 176 So. 719 (Miss.); People v. Angier, 44 Cal.App.2d 417, 112 P.2d 659 (Cal.); Hopper v. State, Okl.Cr., 302 P.2d 162 (Okl.); State v. Withrow, 142 W.Va. 522, 96 S.E.2d 913 (W. Va.); Wharton v. State, 58 Ga.App. 439, 198 S.E. 823 ......
-
State v. Lowry, s. 437 and 438
...common-law definition.' 22 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 21, p. 59; McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 81 N.E.2d 671 (Ind.1948); State v. Pratt, 151 Me. 236, 116 A.2d 924 (1955); State v. Quatro, 31 N.J.Super. 51, 105 A.2d 913 (1954); State v. Johnson, 293 S.W.2d 907 (Mo.1956). While all federal crime......
-
Yde v. State
...judicial doctrines" but are dealing with past statutory construction. I believe this distinction is critical. In State v. Pratt, 151 Me. 236, 237-38, 116 A.2d 924, 925 (1955), where the State urged that the Court adopt a broader statutory interpretation than that previously given, it was "T......