Read United States v. King, which discusses the assimilation of a NJ incest offense at court-martial. The offense elements are:
"c. An actor is guilty of sexual assault if he commits an act of sexual penetration with another person under any one of the following circumstances: ... (3)The victim is at least 16 but less than 18 years old and: (a)The actor is related to the victim by blood or affinity to the third degree...." Title 2C, Chapter 14, Section 2, Subsection (c)(3)(a) of the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice Since this would punish consensual private sex with someone over the age of consent, shouldn't there have been a Marcum analysis?
1984
8/17/2021 07:25:31 pm
No, because it was not consensual;
Anon
8/17/2021 07:42:02 pm
Looks like you just ran an as-applied Marcum test. And proved the point that it should have been done.
Isaac Kennen
8/19/2021 05:21:57 am
A person must be over 18 in New Jersey to consent to incest. 8/19/2021 09:16:18 am
1. Does it matter that the UCMJ already has "incest" covered in various provisions of 120+?
Brenner M. Fissell
8/19/2021 12:02:42 pm
I think you are all quite confused about what Marcum requires. You are claiming that it is not "applicable" when in fact you are applying the Marcum analysis in making that same argument. A Marcum analysis is triggered if a facial reading of an offense potentially implicates the Lawrence liberty interest--THEN, Marcum "applies" in the sense that an as-applied analysis is conducted to see if the accused's actual conduct falls outside of Lawrence. Comments are closed.
|
Links
CAAF -Daily Journal -Current Term Opinions ACCA AFCCA CGCCA NMCCA Joint R. App. Pro. Global MJ Reform LOC Mil. Law Army Lawyer Resources Categories
All
Archives
April 2022
|