{"issue_text":"Whether the conviction for extra-marital sexual intercourse with a young person under 16 was supported by evidence beyond reasonable doubt","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Complainant's age, appellant's belief about age, complainant's credibility"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the trial court erred in accepting some aspects of complainant's evidence while rejecting others","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Complainant's multiple lies, selective credibility finding"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the sentence was appropriate given the circumstances","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Complainant was 14 days shy of 16, appellant used protection, appellant unmarried"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant was charged with raping a 16-year-old female juvenile but was acquitted of rape and instead convicted of extra-marital sexual intercourse with a young person under 16. The complainant had told the appellant she was 16, but was actually 15 years and 11 months old. The appellant appealed both conviction and sentence.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases