Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

State v. Kinney

Supreme Court of Vermont
171 Vt. 239 (2000)


Facts

Steven Kinney (defendant) was charged with kidnapping, sexual assault and lewd and lascivious behavior stemming from events on the night of October 9, 1998. Kinney was drinking and doing drugs with friends. Kinney and several friends then went to the house of Luca Sweetser, hoping to buy cocaine. Kinney went into the house and emerged carrying the victim over his shoulder. Kinney contended that he found Sweetser and the victim in bed, the victim woke up, began talking to him and agreed to go help him buy drugs. Kinney claimed the victim giggled and went willingly. The victim testified that she did not go willingly, that Kinney pulled her out of bed and threw her over his shoulder. The victim claimed that she repeatedly stated that she did not want to go and asked to be let out of the car. The group went back to the house where they had been drinking and everyone, including the victim, drank and smoked pot. The victim testified that she did so because she did not want Kinney and his friends to think she was scared. Kinney and the victim then went to Kinney’s house where they had sex. Kinney claimed it was consensual; the victim said Kinney raped her. The victim went to sleep and in the morning, Kinney arranged for a friend to take her home. The prosecution called Dr. Jan Tyler to testify about rape trauma syndrome. Kinney objected and was overruled. Tyler testified that rape trauma syndrome is a set of behaviors common to rape victims. Tyler also testified that victims of rape are more likely to make verbal protests than by struggling or screaming and that it is not unusual for a victim to fall asleep immediately after the assault due to denial and withdrawal. Tyler further testified that the false reporting rate by rape victims is quite low, about two percent. Kinney was convicted and appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Dooley, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.