Supreme Court Upholds Crimes Against Nature Statute

Story >

Supreme Court Upholds Crimes Against Nature Statute

Special Report - May 10, 2007
On May 4, 2007, the North Carolina Supreme Court upheld a ruling of the N.C. Court of Appeals that allowed a minor to be prosecuted for violating the State’s crimes against nature statute. The case involved a minor who was fourteen at the time he had sex with a twelve-year old girl in the parking lot of a bowling ally while her parents bowled inside. The minor was found guilty of violating the crimes against nature statute in a lower court.

Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the N.C. Academy of Trial Lawyers argued by amicus brief that the crimes against nature statute is facially invalid under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas and violated equal protection concerns. The Supreme Court refused to consider such arguments for the first time on appeal.

The Court rejected the minor’s contention that the crimes against nature statute should be interpreted as requiring the same age separation as other statutes that make sexual activity between minors illegal, if the minors are at least three years apart in age. The minor defendant argued that he was not guilty of committing the crime against nature because he is two years older than the minor girl. The Court looked at the plain language of the statute and refused to judicially impose an age differential element into the crime against nature statute.

The Court also determined that preventing sexual conduct between minors furthers a legitimate government interest and application of the crime against nature law. Citing the need to protect young citizens from sexually transmitted diseases, psychological harm, and their own inability to make reasoned decisions, the Court upheld the application of the crime against nature statute to minors, even without an age differential.

Finally, the Court refused to apply Lawrence v. Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that held unconstitutional a Texas sodomy statute. The N.C. Court distinguished Lawrence from the present case, because the U.S. Supreme Court expressly stated in Lawrence that the case did not involve minors.

Tami Fitzgerald, Attorney for the North Carolina Family Policy Council commented on the decision. “We are pleased that the N.C. Supreme Court has upheld the integrity of our law forbidding crimes against nature. It is important that minors be protected from unlawful sexual activity, no matter what their age.”