# Fitzgerald v. United States

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · March 19, 1982 · 443 A.2d 1295

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9754026

## Case

- **Full name:** Walter L. FITZGERALD, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** March 19, 1982
- **Citations:** 443 A.2d 1295; 1982 D.C. App. LEXIS 313
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Mack
- **Judges:** Newman, Kelly, Kern, Nebeker, MacK, Ferren, Pryor, Yeagley, Gallagher
- **Cited by:** 29 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9754026

## Opinion text

MACK, Associate Judge,
dissenting:
I see no justification for requiring corroboration in sex offenses based upon distinctions between a “mature” female complainant (see Arnold v. United States, D.C.App., 358 A.2d 335 (1976) (en banc)) or any other complainant — male or female, adult or minor. In this en banc posture again, and having taken the route we took in Arnold , I agree with Chief Judge Newman, that with appropriate safeguards, we should abolish the requirement across the board.
I respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9754026. Public record. Not legal advice.