No Next Item No Next Conference Can't Favor Can't Forget Item List Conference Home Entrance    Help
View Responses


Grex Agora41 Item 126: Sex law drift
Entered by brighn on Thu Apr 25 19:42:47 UTC 2002:

Sindi asked in another item if sex between single people is legal in the state
of Michigan. Here are the codes that I'm aware of, but I am not a lawyer, and
there may be other codes. Brief answer: No, not generally.
 
750.335 Lewd and lascivious cohabitation and gross lewdness. [M.S.A. 28.567
]
Sec. 335. Any man or woman, not being married to each other, who shall lewdly
and lasciviously associate and cohabit together, and any man or woman, married
or unmarried, who shall be guilty of open and gross lewdness and lascivious
behavior, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the
county jail not more than 1 year, or by fine of not more than $500.00. No
prosecution shall be commenced under this section after 1 year from the time
of committing the offense. 

750.338b Gross indecency; between male and female persons. [M.S.A. 28.570(2)
]
Sec. 338b. Any male person who, in public or in private, commits or is a party
to the commission of any act of gross indecency with a female person shall
be guilty of a felony, punishable as provided in this section. Any female
person who, in public or in private, commits or is a party to the commission
of any act of gross indecency with a male person shall be guilty of a felony
punishable as provided in this section. Any person who procures or attempts
to procure the commission of any act of gross indecency by and between any
male person and any female person shall be guilty of a felony punishable as
provided in this section. Any person convicted of a felony as provided in this
section shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more
than 5 years, or by a fine of not more than $2,500.00, or if such person was
at the time of the said offense a sexually delinquent person, may be
punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for an indeterminate term, the
minimum of which shall be 1 day and the maximum of which shall be life. 

750.158 Crime against nature or sodomy; penalty. [M.S.A. 28.355 ]
Sec. 158. Any person who shall commit the abominable and detestable crime
against nature either with mankind or with any animal shall be guilty of a
felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not more than 15 years,
or if such person was at the time of the said offense a sexually delinquent
person, may be punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for an
indeterminate term, the minimum of which shall be 1 day and the maximum of
which shall be life. 
 
Incidentally, the same code includes the implied Age of Consent of 16:
750.520e Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree; misdemeanor. 
Sec. 520e. (1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fourth
degree if he or she engages in sexual contact with another person and if any
of the following circumstances exist: (a) That other person is at least 13
years of age but less than 16 years of age, and the actor is 5 or more years
older than that other person. 

(b) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the sexual contact. Force or
coercion includes, but is not limited to, any of the following circumstances:
(i) When the actor overcomes the victim through the actual application of
physical force or physical violence. 

(ii) When the actor coerces the victim to submit by threatening to use force
or violence on the victim, and the victim believes that the actor has the
present ability to execute that threat. 

(iii) When the actor coerces the victim to submit by threatening to retaliate
in the future against the victim, or any other person, and the victim believes
that the actor has the ability to execute that threat. As used in this
subparagraph, to retaliate includes threats of physical punishment,
kidnapping, or extortion. 

(iv) When the actor engages in the medical treatment or examination of the
victim in a manner or for purposes which are medically recognized as unethical
or unacceptable. 

(v) When the actor achieves the sexual contact through concealment or by the
element of surprise. 


(c) The actor knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally
incapable, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless. 

(d) That other person is related to the actor by blood or affinity to the
third degree and the sexual contact occurs under circumstances not otherwise
prohibited by this chapter. It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution
under this subdivision that the other person was in a position of authority
over the defendant and used this authority to coerce the defendant to violate
this subdivision. The defendant has the burden of proving this defense by a
preponderance of the evidence. This subdivision does not apply if both persons
are lawfully married to each other at the time of the alleged violation. 

(e) The actor is a mental health professional and the sexual contact occurs
during or within 2 years after the period in which the victim is his or her
client or patient and not his or her spouse. The consent of the victim is not
a defense to a prosecution under this subdivision. This does not indicate that
the victim is mentally incompetent. 


(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree is a misdemeanor punishable
by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $500.00,
or both. 

(all code taken verbatim from www.michiganlegislature.com)

For the record, "adultery" has pretty much always involved at least one
married person.

18 responses total.



#1 of 18 by rcurl on Thu Apr 25 20:01:18 2002:

These should mostly be unconstitutional, or unenforceable, because of the
*prejudgments* of "lewdly and lasciviously", "gross lewdness and
lascivious behavior", "act of gross indecency", or "abominable and
detestable crime against nature", if a specific act is not named. For
example, simply having sexual intercourse is not named in 750.335 or
750.338. 



#2 of 18 by brighn on Thu Apr 25 20:32:43 2002:

Note the definite article on "abominable and detestable crime against nature":
There's exactly one that we're refering to, and we're too prudish to tell you
exactly what it is, and besides, we ALL know anyway.

Much of that particular act (and this is just a sampling) is unconstitutional.
The same act contains the infamous "no swearing in front of women and
children" law that was, in fact, just ruled unconstitutional.


#3 of 18 by jmsaul on Thu Apr 25 21:35:49 2002:

A guy in Ann Arbor tried to make the Sodomy law go away some years ago.  He's
paralyzed from the waist down, and had two ex-girlfriends wheel him into the
AAPD and try to file charges because he had performed oral sex on them.  The
cops on duty basically told him to piss off, because they had real crimes to
investigate.

That's the problem with trying to get rid of one of these laws -- it usually
takes someone dumb enough to prosecute under it.  The swearing defendant was
unlucky enough to run into one.


#4 of 18 by jp2 on Thu Apr 25 21:46:48 2002:

This response has been erased.



#5 of 18 by jazz on Thu Apr 25 22:44:05 2002:

        I wish to commit the abominable and detestable crime against nature!


#6 of 18 by keesan on Thu Apr 25 23:54:54 2002:

Whose nature?


#7 of 18 by dbunker on Fri Apr 26 00:30:12 2002:

Re #5: You're gonna continue grexing?


#8 of 18 by jp2 on Fri Apr 26 00:40:56 2002:

This response has been erased.



#9 of 18 by russ on Fri Apr 26 02:30:21 2002:

Re #3:  Charlie Van Boven.  I attended the same school with him;
can't say I knew him, though.

I like arabella's take on the complaint:  the women come up to
the desk sargeant and say, "He gave us orgasms with his tongue,
and we want to complain."  I'm amazed that the cop could keep
a straight face long enough to tell them to get lost.


#10 of 18 by jmsaul on Fri Apr 26 03:22:16 2002:

"What, was he bad at it?"


#11 of 18 by other on Fri Apr 26 05:00:19 2002:

Charlie Van Boven...  One summer, several years ago, I lived in the 
"Joint House" co-op on S. Forest.  Charlie Van Boven lived on the ground 
floor.  I had a couple of inspirations for bumper stickers that he 
decided to print up and sell.  He never sold enough of them to recover 
his costs, and I ended up with a box full of bumper stickers which said 

        Quayle on Drugs: "Just say Noe!"
and
        CLINTON/GORE '92
        The LESSER Evil


#12 of 18 by xtras on Fri Apr 26 05:38:12 2002:

hello everybody  :-).


#13 of 18 by mary on Fri Apr 26 11:44:16 2002:

Re: #9  And after having a good chuckle the lesbian police officer
would probably congratulate them.


#14 of 18 by keesan on Fri Apr 26 13:30:14 2002:

Hi wangxi.


#15 of 18 by jmsaul on Fri Apr 26 14:33:00 2002:

Re #11:  I think I've seen both of those, so he must have sold some of them.


#16 of 18 by jazz on Fri Apr 26 14:54:43 2002:

        Always liked "Honk if you helped lick Bush in 2000".


#17 of 18 by flem on Tue Apr 30 16:57:00 2002:

Heh, I used to hang out in Joint House.  :)


#18 of 18 by other on Sat May 4 01:24:15 2002:

I think the only ones I've ever seen on a car were on my own.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

No Next Item No Next Conference Can't Favor Can't Forget Item List Conference Home Entrance    Help

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss