People v. Ezeonu
155 Misc. 2d 344, 1992 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 410, 588 N.Y.S.2d 116 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
New York will not recognize a polygamous marriage that was validly entered into in another jurisdiction if doing so would violate the state's strong public policy against bigamy. Consequently, such a marriage is void and cannot be used as a defense to a criminal charge that requires an unmarried status between the defendant and the victim.
Facts:
- Dr. Ezeonu, a Nigerian national, was legally married to his first wife under both Nigerian and New York law.
- While his first wife was still living and the marriage was not dissolved, Ezeonu entered into a purported second marriage in Nigeria with a 13-year-old complainant.
- This second marriage was conducted pursuant to Nigerian laws and tribal customs that permit polygamy.
- Ezeonu subsequently brought the complainant to New York.
Procedural Posture:
- The People indicted Dr. Ezeonu in a New York trial court on charges of rape in the first degree and rape in the second degree.
- Prior to trial, the prosecution and defense jointly submitted a stipulated question to the court for a ruling in limine.
- The question asked the court to determine the legal status of the defendant's purported second marriage for the purposes of asserting a marriage defense to the charge of rape in the second degree.
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 New York law recognize a defendant as 'married' to a complainant for the purposes of a statutory rape defense (Penal Law § 130.30), when the purported marriage was a second, polygamous marriage legally contracted in Nigeria while the defendant had a living spouse from a prior, undissolved marriage?
Opinions:
Majority - Joseph Fisch, J.
No. A polygamous marriage, even if valid where performed, is 'absolutely void' in New York and cannot be recognized as a valid marriage for the purpose of a criminal defense. While New York generally recognizes marriages that are valid where they are consummated, this rule of comity yields to the state's strong public policy. New York's public policy against polygamy is clearly established in its laws, which declare bigamous marriages 'absolutely void' (Domestic Relations Law § 6) and criminalize bigamy (Penal Law § 255.15). Citing precedent such as Earle v. Earle, the court affirmed that it will refuse to recognize marriages that are repugnant to its public policy. Therefore, because Ezeonu was already married when he purported to marry the complainant, that second marriage is void in New York, and he cannot claim to be 'married' to her to defend against a charge of rape in the second degree.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies that the public policy exception to the rule of comity for recognizing foreign marriages applies in the criminal context, not just in civil matters like divorce or inheritance. It establishes that a defendant cannot use a legal status from another country (like a polygamous marriage) as a shield against criminal liability in New York when that status fundamentally contradicts New York's penal and domestic relations laws. This reinforces the principle that a forum state's core public policies can override the general rule of recognizing acts that are legal elsewhere, particularly in matters of criminal defense.
