“The holdings in State v. Pearson and State v. Monk have transformed our sex abuse statutes into general assault statutes where the 14 assault has some effect on the reproductive or excretory organs of the victim or defendant.”
How later courts described this case
- “The holdings in State v. Pearson and State v. Monk have transformed our sex abuse statutes into general assault statutes where the 14 assault has some effect on the reproductive or excretory organs of the victim or defendant.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CARTER, Justice
(dissenting).
In deciding this case, I would apply the criteria that I suggest in my dissent in State v. Pearson, 514 N.W.2d 452 (1994) (filed this date). However, in applying either that test or the majority’s criteria in the Pearson case, I believe that the defendant was entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal.