People v. Dorsey
1980 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2430, 104 Misc. 2d 963, 429 N.Y.S.2d 828 (1980)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Forcible compulsion is established when a perpetrator's actions create an implied threat that places a person in reasonable fear of immediate death or serious physical injury, considering the totality of the circumstances. Under New York's 'earnest resistance' standard, a victim is only required to offer resistance that is reasonable for a person who genuinely refuses to participate in a sexual act under all attendant circumstances, which may include non-resistance if the situation is hopeless.
Facts:
- A 49-year-old woman, who was five feet tall and weighed 130 pounds, entered an elevator in her apartment building.
- A 15-year-old male, Gonzalez, approximately five feet seven inches tall and weighing over 200 pounds, entered the elevator with her.
- Gonzalez manipulated the elevator's controls, causing it to stop between floors.
- Gonzalez then ordered the woman to undress, repeating the command when she did not immediately respond.
- The woman complied and Gonzalez subjected her to acts of sexual intercourse and sodomy.
- Throughout the sexual assault, Gonzalez did not use any physical force beyond that inherent in the sexual acts.
- Gonzalez did not make any explicit verbal threats against the woman until after the acts were completed and he was leaving.
- The woman did not scream or physically resist because she believed it would be futile and that no one could hear her.
Procedural Posture:
- The People of New York indicted Gonzalez on charges of rape in the first degree and sodomy in the first degree in the Supreme Court of New York County, a trial-level court.
- The case proceeded to a jury trial.
- At the end of the prosecution's case, Gonzalez's defense counsel moved for a trial order of dismissal, arguing the evidence was legally insufficient to prove forcible compulsion.
- The trial court reserved its decision on the motion.
- The jury returned a verdict of guilty on both counts.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a defendant commit rape and sodomy by forcible compulsion when a victim submits without overt physical resistance or an explicit threat, but is trapped in a stalled elevator by a physically larger assailant who has demonstrated control over the environment?
Opinions:
Majority - Walter M. Schackman, J.
Yes. Forcible compulsion can be established by an implied threat arising from the totality of the circumstances, and the required level of resistance is only what is reasonable given those circumstances. The court found that forcible compulsion was established through two independent lines of reasoning. First, an implied threat existed because the defendant trapped the victim, who was physically smaller, in a stalled elevator between floors with no means of escape. This act of control and the menacing environment it created placed the victim in reasonable fear of immediate death or serious physical injury, even without a weapon or an explicit verbal threat. Second, the defendant's act of stopping the elevator was a physical act directed against the complainant, which, combined with his significant physical advantage, constituted physical force capable of overcoming 'earnest resistance.' Given the hopelessness of the victim's situation, her complete compliance was the only resistance that could be reasonably expected.
Analysis:
This decision is significant for its application of New York's recently amended 'earnest resistance' statute, moving away from the archaic 'utmost resistance' standard. It clarifies that forcible compulsion does not require overt violence or explicit threats but can be established by the perpetrator's control over the environment and the resulting implicit coercion. The ruling shifts the legal focus from scrutinizing the victim's response to analyzing the coercive nature of the defendant's conduct and the totality of the circumstances, establishing a precedent that acknowledges psychological and situational coercion as sufficient elements of force.
