State v. Lucas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Upon a charge of assault with intent to commit rape of a female person above the age of twelve years, the State is required to show that the défendant actually committed an assault with intent to force the female to have sexual relations with him, notwithstanding any resistance she might make; however, since a child under the age of twelve years cannot give her consent, the requirement of force is not necessary to constitute the offense. The vast majority of the states subscribe to the doctrine that an assault upon a female under the age of consent with intent to have intercourse, constitutes the crime of assault with intent to commit rape. This is well stated in 75 C.J.S., Rape, § 28, p. 493 as follows: “ ‘Where one touches or handles or takes hold of the person of a female under the age of consent with the present intent of having sexual intercourse with her then and there, he commits the offense of assault with intent to rape; and, when nothing but actual intercourse remains to follow acts done with intent to have intercourse with a girl under the age of consent, the crime is committed. Neither penetration nor an attempt' thereof is necessary to constitute the crime of assault with intent to rape a female under the age of consent.’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Hartsell

2. ““We do not have to leave North Carolina for citations in support of the above position for as early as 1880, when the age of consent was ten years, our Court said in State v. Dancy, 83 N.C. 608 : “The elements of ‘(f) orce and want of consent must be satisfactorily shown in the case of carnal knowledge of a female of the age of ten or more, but they are conclusively presumed in the case of such knowledge of a female child under that age, and no proof will be received to repel such presumption.’ “It had previously said that in order to convict the defendant, ‘the sufferer being under ten years of age, it was sufficient to show that he attempted to do the act; to carnally know and abuse the child, who was incapable of consenting.’ . . . The charge ‘is supported by proof of an assault with intent to unlawfully and carnally know and abuse a female child under the age of ten years.’ S. v. Johnston, 76 N.C. 209 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Hartsell

3. ““ ‘Where a connection with a female child under the age of consent is considered as rape, it is almost universally held that an attempt to have such connection is an assault with intent to commit rape, the consent of the child being wholly immaterial; since the consent of such an infant is void as to the principal crime, it is equally so in respect to the incipient advances of the offender.’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Hartsell