State v. Bunyard
Kansas Supreme Court
281 Kan. 392, 133 P.3d 14 (2006)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Josiah Bunyard (defendant), 21, met 17-year-old E.N. at a party. Bunyard invited E.N. and a friend to watch a DVD movie in his car. A short time later, the friend exited the car and Bunyard and E.N. began kissing and removing their clothes. After beginning intercourse, E.N. asked Bunyard to stop. Bunyard refused. After nearly 10 minutes, E.N. began to cry and Bunyard stopped. Four days later, E.N. reported the incident to the police. The State of Kansas (plaintiff) charged Bunyard with the rape of E.N. During deliberations, the jury asked the trial court whether withdrawal of consent after penetration fit the legal definition of rape. The trial court did not answer the jury’s question, but instead referred the jury back to the instructions on the elements of the offense. The jury convicted Bunyard of raping E.N. Bunyard appealed, arguing that the rape statute did not cover postpenetration conduct. Bunyard further argued that even if rape can occur after consensual penetration, the state failed to prove that he did not stop within a reasonable time after E.N. verbally withdrew her consent. The court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court of Kansas granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Davis, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
