Commonwealth v. Hacker
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
15 A.3d 333 (2011)
Facts
Lisa Hacker (defendant) was regularly visited by her 13-year-old nephew and NA, the nephew’s 12-year-old female friend. One night, Hacker dared NA to perform oral sex on her nephew, threatening to tell NA’s mother that NA had misbehaved if NA did not comply. NA performed the act. Hacker was charged with and convicted of solicitation to commit the rape of a child. Hacker argued that she could not be convicted of solicitation because she did not know that NA was under the age of 13. The trial court found that because mistake of age was not a defense to the rape of a child, it was not a defense to solicitation of that same crime. Hacker appealed to the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The appellate court reversed the conviction, finding that solicitation was a specific-intent crime that required Hacker to have a specific intent for all elements of the underlying offense of child rape. The court found that without evidence that Hacker knew NA was under 13, a jury could not convict Hacker for solicitation. The Commonwealth (plaintiff) appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Eakin, J.)
Dissent (Saylor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 707,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
