The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Throughout the police investigation, D consistently denied ever having sexual intercourse with J.F. Shortly before trial, he admitted that they had engaged in sexual intercourse on January 2, 2011, but defended it as consensual. To support his defense, d testified that J.F. had a crush on him and that the two had engaged in sexual intercourse on a prior occasion in July 2010. J.F. initially denied ever having sex with D before the January incident. At trial, she admitted to having sex with D on both occasions but insisted she did not consent to either. D's sister did not witness the alleged rape but was in the vicinity when it occurred and testified that J.F. had a crush on D. The court did not D's and his sister's testimony to be credible, noting D's evasive responses to questions and inconsistent story. The court found J.F.'s testimony to be credible. The judge ruled that the State (P) had proved rape in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt and that D had failed to prove the defense of consent by a preponderance of the evidence. The appeals court affirmed. D appealed.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.