State v. Brooks
Kansas Supreme Court
317 P.3d 54 (2014)
- Written by Kaitlin Pomeroy-Murphy, JD
Facts
After being married for several years, George Brooks (defendant) and J.P. divorced. Brooks gained access to J.P.’s email account and found messages between J.P. and one of her coworkers indicating that they were having an affair. Brooks called J.P. and told her that he had copies of the emails and would be coming over to her house for sex. Brooks arrived at J.P.’s house with the emails in hand and told J.P. that if she did not have sex with him, he would expose the affair to her employer and her coworker’s wife. J.P. made clear that she did not want to engage in sexual intercourse with Brooks. Brooks told J.P. to remove her clothes. Brooks became agitated when J.P. did not comply, so J.P. decided to do what he said. Brooks had intercourse with J.P., who hid her face in her hands and closed her eyes while it was happening. Afterward, Brooks refused to provide J.P. the emails and told her he would be back for more sex. The following day, J.P. told her lawyer and a counselor what had happened, and they encouraged her to report the nonconsensual sex to the police. Brooks was prosecuted for and convicted of one count of rape. Brooks appealed, and the appeals court reversed his conviction, finding insufficient evidence. The state supreme court granted the state’s (plaintiff) petition to review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rosen, J.)
Dissent (Moritz, J.)
Dissent (Johnson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
