legislative intent

The applicant pleaded guilty before the Circuit Court of Westmoreland for the offence of having sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16, in violation of section 10(1) of the Sexual Offences Act. He was in a serious relationship with the underage girl, but the matter was brought to the attention of the police when the complainant discovered she was pregnant and there was a dispute regarding the defendant’s paternity (tests showed he indeed was the father).

In Hicks v. State of Alabama (2014), the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the conviction of a woman charged under the state’s chemical endangerment of a child statute after her newborn tested positive for cocaine. The defendant contended that the legislature had not intended the statute to apply to unborn children and further argued that, if interpreted to include fetuses, the law constituted poor public policy and was unconstitutionally vague.

A woman filed for an ex parte protection order against her estranged husband alleging that he vandalized her home and vehicle, called her employer and tried to get her fired, assaulted her repeatedly and was arrested for domestic violence, and regularly called and harassed her. On these grounds, she requested the immediate ex parte order of protection from the trial court. The trial court issued the order and set a hearing date that did not fall within the required ten days of service of the order per

The appellant was convicted of (i) aiding the commission of female genital mutilation (“FGM)” on several girls, (ii) failing to report the commission of FGM, and (iii) allowing her premises to be used to perform FGM.  She pled guilty to the crimes and was sentenced to pay a fine of Kshs. 200,000 (or 3 years of imprisonment if she defaulted on the payment).  On appeal, she argued that the sentence was overly harsh and oppressive because she was a single mother of three children.  Justice M.

In the case People v. Alonzo, the defendant was charged with several counts of sexual abuse based on multiple groping acts committed against two women during a single, brief encounter. The issue before the Court of Appeals was whether each individual touch could be prosecuted as a separate offense or whether the conduct amounted to one continuous act per victim.

A trial court granted Jolliffe a temporary ex parte family violence protective order against her former fiancé, Roper, following an incident of violence at Roper’s apartment. There was a hearing regarding the protective order scheduled eight days later. Roper motioned for limited discovery and a jury trial. The Court denied the motion for a jury trial but granted limited discovery.