State v. Limon: Difference between revisions

State of Kansas v. Matthew R. Limon
State of Kansas v. Matthew R. Limon
Court	Supreme Court of Kansas
Full case name	State v. Limon
Decided	October 21, 2005
Citations	280 Kan. 275; 122 P.3d 22
Case history
Prior actions	32 Kan. App. 2d 369; 83 P.3d 22 (2004)
Holding
	A state law allowing for lesser punishment for statutory rape convictions if the partners were of different sexes than if they were of the same sex was found unconstitutional under both the federal and Kansas state constitutions
Court membership
Chief judge	Kay McFarland
Case opinions
Majority	Marla J. Luckert
	Davis, Gernon took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 12:13, 24 September 2024

State v. Limon, 280 Kan. 275, 122 P.3d 22 (2005),^[1] is a Kansas Supreme Court case in which a state law allowing for lesser punishment for statutory rape convictions if the partners were of different sexes than if they were of the same sex was found unconstitutional under both the federal and Kansas state constitutions. It was among the first cases to cite the United States Supreme Court decision Lawrence v. Texas as precedent, months after the Virginia Supreme Court did similarly in Martin v. Ziherl.

Background

In February 2000, a week after his eighteenth birthday, Kansas resident Matthew R. Limon engaged in a voluntary act of oral sex with a 14-year-old boy. Both were residents of a home for the mentally disabled.^[2] The difference in their ages at the time of the act was three years, one month and a number of days. Under the state's Romeo and Juliet law (K.S.A. § 21-3522), the penalties for statutory rape are less severe if the incident involves two teenagers. The Kansas statute specifically excluded same-sex sexual conduct.^[3] Because of this exclusion, Limon was charged under K.S.A. § 21-3505(a)(2) with criminal sodomy.^[4]

Limon's attorneys filed a pretrial motion to dismiss the charges, arguing that K.S.A. § 21-3522 was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it discriminated on the basis of sex and sexual orientation. The motion was denied and Limon was convicted of criminal sodomy. He was sentenced to 17 years and two months in prison. Had the sexual encounter been between a male and female, the maximum sentence would have been 15 months. Limon was also required to register as a sex offender and to submit to five years of supervision upon release.^[4]

Appeals

Limon appealed his case to the Kansas Court of Appeals, which affirmed his conviction citing Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), a United States Supreme Court case which upheld sodomy laws as constitutional.^[5] His appeal to the Kansas Supreme Court was also denied and Limon appealed to the United States Supreme Court in 2002.^[4]

On June 26, 2003, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) that a Texas state law forbidding consensual sex between two people of the same sex was unconstitutional. In doing so, the Court explicitly overruled Bowers, the basis for the decision by the Kansas Court of Appeals.^[6] On June 27, 2003, in light of its decision in Lawrence, the Court granted Limon's petition for certiorari, vacated the decision of the Kansas Court of Appeals, and remanded the case for further consideration in what is known as a GVR order.^[7]^[8] The Kansas Court of Appeals again upheld the conviction and sentence in January 2004, in a 2-1 ruling.^[9] Since the Kansas Court of Appeals found Lawrence not to be controlling (because unlike Lawrence and its consenting adults, Limon's "case involved a 14-year-old developmentally disabled child"), even on remand from the Supreme Court, the case was once again appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court, and this time, they accepted the case. The Kansas Supreme Court unanimously ruled on October 21, 2005, that the "Romeo and Juliet" statute violated the Equal Protection Clauses of both the United States Constitution and the Kansas constitution and struck the words "and are members of the opposite sex" from K.S.A. § 21-3522.^[1] Limon was released from prison on November 3, 2005.^[10]

References

^ ^a ^b State v. Limon, 280 Kan. 275 (2005).
^ Manning, Carl (November 19, 2005). "Matthew Limon returning to court on new charge". Lawrence Journal World. Retrieved June 16, 2018.
^ K.S.A. § 21-3522 as passed by the Kansas Legislature reads "(a) Unlawful voluntary sexual relations is engaging in voluntary: (1) sexual intercourse; (2) sodomy; or (3) lewd fondling or touching with a child who is 14 years of age but less than 16 years of age and the offender is less than 19 years of age and less than four years of age older than the child and child and the offender are the only parties involved and are members of the opposite sex."
^ ^a ^b ^c "Limon v. Kansas - Case Background". American Civil Liberties Union. September 8, 2005. Retrieved July 1, 2010.
^ Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).
^ Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).
^ Limon v. Kansas, 539 U.S. 955 (2003).
^ Stout, David (June 27, 2003). "Justices Void Prison Term Given Gay Teenager in Kansasn". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 22, 2019. Retrieved July 7, 2022.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
^ State v. Limon, 32 Kan. App. 2d 369 (2004).
^ Bauer, Laura (November 4, 2005). "Defendant in gay sex case released from jail". The Kansas City Star. p. B1.

External links

Text of State v. Limon, 280 Kan. 275, 122 P.3d 22 (2005) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar

[LimonSupreme-1] State v. Limon, 280 Kan. 275 (2005).

[2] Manning, Carl (November 19, 2005). "Matthew Limon returning to court on new charge". Lawrence Journal World. Retrieved June 16, 2018.

[3] K.S.A. § 21-3522 as passed by the Kansas Legislature reads "(a) Unlawful voluntary sexual relations is engaging in voluntary: (1) sexual intercourse; (2) sodomy; or (3) lewd fondling or touching with a child who is 14 years of age but less than 16 years of age and the offender is less than 19 years of age and less than four years of age older than the child and child and the offender are the only parties involved and are members of the opposite sex."

[aclu-4] "Limon v. Kansas - Case Background". American Civil Liberties Union. September 8, 2005. Retrieved July 1, 2010.

[5] Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

[6] Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

[7] Limon v. Kansas, 539 U.S. 955 (2003).

[8] Stout, David (June 27, 2003). "Justices Void Prison Term Given Gay Teenager in Kansasn". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 22, 2019. Retrieved July 7, 2022.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)

[9] State v. Limon, 32 Kan. App. 2d 369 (2004).

[10] Bauer, Laura (November 4, 2005). "Defendant in gay sex case released from jail". The Kansas City Star. p. B1.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Short description|2005 Kansas Supreme Court Case Regarding Statutory Rape}}
+{{Use mdy dates|date=June 2020}}
 {{Infobox court case 2
-| name                = Matthew R. Limon
+| name                = State of Kansas v. Matthew R. Limon
-| court               = [[Kansas Supreme Court]]
+| court               = [[Supreme Court of Kansas]]
-| image               = Kansas Supreme Court seal.png
+| image               =
-| imagesize           = 100px
+| imagesize           = 150px
-| imagealt            =
 | caption             =
 | full name           = State v. Limon
@@ Line 22: / Line 23: @@
 | SubmitDate          =
 | SubmitYear          =
-| date_decided        = October 21 2005
+| date_decided        = October 21, 2005
-| citations           = 280 Kan. 275, 122 P.3d 22
+| citations           = [https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2576319/state-v-limon/ 280 Kan. 275]; 122 [[P.3d]] 22
 | Neutral Citation    =
 | Other Citations     =
@@ Line 30: / Line 31: @@
 | Cases_cited         =
 | Legislation_cited   =
+| prior_actions       = [https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/limon_decision.pdf 32 Kan. App. 2d 369]; 83 [[P.3d]] 22 (2004)
-| prior_actions       =
 | appealed from       =
 | appealed to         =
@@ Line 121: / Line 122: @@
 }}
 {{italic title}}
-'''''State v. Limon''''' ([[case citation|280 Kan. 275, 122 P.3d 22]]) is a 2005 [[Kansas Supreme Court]] case in which a state law allowing for lesser punishment for [[statutory rape]] convictions if the partners were of different sexes than if they were of the same sex was found unconstitutional under both the federal and Kansas state constitutions. It was among the first cases to cite the [[Supreme Court of the United States|United States Supreme Court]] decision ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'' as precedent, months after the [[Virginia Supreme Court]] did similarly in ''[[Martin v. Ziherl]]''.
+'''''State v. Limon''''', 280 Kan. 275, 122 [[P.3d]] 22 (2005),<ref name=LimonSupreme>{{cite court |litigants = State v. Limon |url  = https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2576319/state-v-limon/ |vol = 280 |reporter = Kan. |opinion = 275 |year = 2005 }}</ref> is a [[Kansas Supreme Court]] case in which a state law allowing for lesser punishment for [[statutory rape]] convictions if the partners were of different sexes than if they were of the same sex was found unconstitutional under both the federal and Kansas state constitutions. It was among the first cases to cite the [[Supreme Court of the United States|United States Supreme Court]] decision ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'' as precedent, months after the [[Virginia Supreme Court]] did similarly in ''[[Martin v. Ziherl]]''.
 ==Background==
-In February 2000, a week after his eighteenth birthday, Kansas resident Matthew R. Limon engaged in a consensual act of oral sex with a 14-year-old boy. The difference in their ages at the time of the act was three years, one month and a number of days. Under the state's [[Romeo and Juliet laws|Romeo and Juliet law]] (K.S.A. § 21-3522), the penalties for [[statutory rape]] are less severe if the incident involves two teenagers. The Kansas statute specifically excluded same-sex sexual conduct.<ref>K.S.A. § 21-3522 as passed by the [[Kansas Legislature]] reads "(a) Unlawful voluntary sexual relations is engaging in voluntary: (1) sexual intercourse; (2) sodomy; or (3) lewd fondling or touching with a child who is 14 years of age but less than 16 years of age and the offender is less than 19 years of age and less than four years of age older than the child and child and the offender are the only parties involved and are members of the opposite sex."</ref> Because of this exclusion, Limon was charged under K.S.A. § 21-3505(a)(2) with criminal sodomy.<ref name = aclu>{{Cite web | title = Limon v. Kansas - Case Background  | publisher = American Civil Liberties Union | date = September 8, 2005 | url = http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aids/limon-v-kansas-case-background| accessdate = July 1, 2010}}</ref>
+In February 2000, a week after his eighteenth birthday, Kansas resident Matthew R. Limon engaged in a voluntary act of oral sex with a 14-year-old boy. Both were residents of a home for the mentally disabled.<ref>{{cite news |url =  http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/nov/19/matthew_limon_returning_court_new_charge/ |title = Matthew Limon returning to court on new charge |work = [[Lawrence Journal World]] |first = Carl |last = Manning |date = November 19, 2005 |access-date = June 16, 2018 }}</ref> The difference in their ages at the time of the act was three years, one month and a number of days. Under the state's [[Romeo and Juliet laws|Romeo and Juliet law]] (K.S.A. § 21-3522), the penalties for [[statutory rape]] are less severe if the incident involves two teenagers. The Kansas statute specifically excluded same-sex sexual conduct.<ref>K.S.A. § 21-3522 as passed by the [[Kansas Legislature]] reads "(a) Unlawful voluntary sexual relations is engaging in voluntary: (1) sexual intercourse; (2) sodomy; or (3) lewd fondling or touching with a child who is 14 years of age but less than 16 years of age and the offender is less than 19 years of age and less than four years of age older than the child and child and the offender are the only parties involved and are members of the opposite sex."</ref> Because of this exclusion, Limon was charged under K.S.A. § 21-3505(a)(2) with criminal sodomy.<ref name = aclu>{{Cite web |title = Limon v. Kansas - Case Background |publisher = American Civil Liberties Union |date = September 8, 2005 |url = https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aids/limon-v-kansas-case-background |accessdate = July 1, 2010 }}</ref>
 Limon's attorneys filed a pretrial [[Motion (legal)|motion]] to dismiss the charges, arguing that K.S.A. § 21-3522 was a violation of the [[Equal Protection Clause]] of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]] because it discriminated on the basis of sex and sexual orientation. The motion was denied and Limon was convicted of criminal sodomy. He was sentenced to 17 years and two months in prison. Had the sexual encounter been between a male and female, the maximum sentence would have been 15 months. Limon was also required to [[Sex offender registries in the United States|register as a sex offender]] and to submit to five years of supervision upon release.<ref name = aclu />
 ==Appeals==
-Limon appealed his case to the [[Kansas Court of Appeals]], which affirmed his conviction citing ''[[Bowers v. Hardwick]]'', 478 U.S. 186 (1986), a United States Supreme Court case which upheld [[Sodomy laws in the United States|sodomy laws]] as constitutional.<ref>{{Cite court|litigants = Bowers v. Hardwick|vol = 478|reporter = US|opinion = 186|pinpoint =|court = Supreme Court of the United States|date = June 30, 1986|url= http://supreme.justia.com/us/478/186/case.html }}</ref> His appeal to the [[Kansas Supreme Court]] was also denied and Limon appealed to the United States Supreme Court in 2002.<ref name = aclu />
+Limon appealed his case to the [[Kansas Court of Appeals]], which affirmed his conviction citing ''[[Bowers v. Hardwick]]'', 478 U.S. 186 (1986), a United States Supreme Court case which upheld [[Sodomy laws in the United States|sodomy laws]] as constitutional.<ref>{{ussc|name=Bowers v. Hardwick|volume=478|page=186|pin=|year=1986}}.</ref> His appeal to the [[Kansas Supreme Court]] was also denied and Limon appealed to the United States Supreme Court in 2002.<ref name = aclu />
-On June 26, 2003, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) that a Texas state law forbidding consensual sex between two people of the same sex was unconstitutional. In doing so, the Court explicitly overruled ''Bowers'', the basis for the decision by the Kansas Court of Appeals.<ref>{{Cite court |litigants = Lawrence v. Texas |vol = 539|reporter = US|opinion = 558|pinpoint =|court = Supreme Court of the United States|date = June 26, 2003 |url= http://supreme.justia.com/us/539/558/case.html}}</ref> On June 27, in light of its decision in ''Lawrence'', the Court granted Limon's petition for certiorari, vacated the decision of the Kansas Court of Appeals, and remanded the case for further consideration in what is known as a [[GVR order]].<ref>{{Cite court |litigants = Limon v. Kansas |vol = 539 |reporter = US |opinion = 955 |pinpoint =  |court = Supreme Court of the United States |date = June 27, 2003 |url= }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news| title = Gay rights case voids 17-year term for teen | newspaper = The St. Petersburg Times | location =St. Petersburg, Florida | page = 10A| publisher = The Washington Post| date = June 28, 2003 | url = https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BbsMAAAAIBAJ&sjid=VF4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6467,2503118&dq=matthew-limon+charged&hl=en| accessdate = July 1, 2010}}</ref> The Kansas Court of Appeals again upheld the conviction and sentence in January 2004, in a 2-1 ruling.<ref>{{Cite court |litigants = State v. Limon |vol = 32 |reporter = Kan. App. 2d |opinion = 369 |pinpoint =  |court = Kansas Court of Appeals |date = 2004 |url = http://www.kscourts.org/cases-and-opinions/opinions/ctapp/2004/20040130/85898.htm| accessdate = February 11, 2014}}</ref> Since the Kansas Court of Appeals found ''Lawrence'' not to be controlling (because unlike ''Lawrence'' and its consenting adults, Limon's "case involved a 14-year-old developmentally disabled child"), even on remand from the Supreme Court, the case was once again appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court, and this time, they accepted the case. The Kansas Supreme Court unanimously ruled on October 21, 2005, that the "Romeo and Juliet" statute violated the Equal Protection Clauses of both the [[United States Constitution]] and the [[Wyandotte Constitution|Kansas constitution]] and struck the words "and are members of the opposite sex" from K.S.A. § 21-3522.<ref>{{Cite court|litigants = State v. Limon|vol =|reporter =|opinion =|pinpoint =|court = Kansas Supreme Court|date = October 21, 2005|url= http://www.kscourts.org/Cases-and-Opinions/opinions/supct/2005/20051021/85898.htm}}</ref> Limon was released from prison on November 3, 2005.<ref>{{Cite news| last = Bauer| first = Laura| title = Defendant in gay sex case released from jail| newspaper = The Kansas City (KS) Star| page = B-1| date = 2005-11-04 }}</ref>
+On June 26, 2003, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) that a Texas state law forbidding consensual sex between two people of the same sex was unconstitutional. In doing so, the Court explicitly overruled ''Bowers'', the basis for the decision by the Kansas Court of Appeals.<ref>{{ussc|name=Lawrence v. Texas|volume=539|page=558|pin=|year=2003}}.</ref> On June 27, 2003, in light of its decision in ''Lawrence'', the Court granted Limon's petition for certiorari, vacated the decision of the Kansas Court of Appeals, and remanded the case for further consideration in what is known as a [[GVR order]].<ref>{{ussc|name=Limon v. Kansas|volume=539|page=955|pin=|year=2003|el=no}}.</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title = Justices Void Prison Term Given Gay Teenager in Kansasn |newspaper = [[The New York Times]] |last=Stout |first=David |author-link=David Stout |date = June 27, 2003 |url = https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/27/politics/justices-void-prison-term-given-gay-teenager-in-kansas.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190822030508/https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/27/politics/justices-void-prison-term-given-gay-teenager-in-kansas.html |access-date = July 7, 2022 |archive-date=2019-08-22 |url-status=unfit}}</ref> The Kansas Court of Appeals again upheld the conviction and sentence in January 2004, in a 2-1 ruling.<ref>{{cite court |litigants = State v. Limon |url = https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/limon_decision.pdf |vol = 32 |reporter = Kan. App. 2d |opinion = 369 |year = 2004 }}</ref> Since the Kansas Court of Appeals found ''Lawrence'' not to be controlling (because unlike ''Lawrence'' and its consenting adults, Limon's "case involved a 14-year-old developmentally disabled child"), even on remand from the Supreme Court, the case was once again appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court, and this time, they accepted the case. The Kansas Supreme Court unanimously ruled on October 21, 2005, that the "Romeo and Juliet" statute violated the Equal Protection Clauses of both the [[United States Constitution]] and the [[Wyandotte Constitution|Kansas constitution]] and struck the words "and are members of the opposite sex" from K.S.A. § 21-3522.<ref name=LimonSupreme/> Limon was released from prison on November 3, 2005.<ref>{{Cite news |last = Bauer |first = Laura |title = Defendant in gay sex case released from jail |newspaper = The Kansas City Star |page = B1 |date = November 4, 2005 }}</ref>
 ==See also==
@@ Line 141: / Line 142: @@
 ==Further reading==
+{{refbegin}}
-* Schvartzman, Shulamit H. "[http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1201&context=shlr “ROMEO AND ROMEO”: AN EXAMINATION OF LIMON V. KANSAS IN LIGHT OF LAWRENCE V. TEXAS]" ([http://www.webcitation.org/6bdVxEW1r Archive]). ''[[Seton Hall Law Review]]''. Volume 35. 2004. p. 359-401. [http://www.researchgate.net/publication/238052156_Romeo_and_Romeo_An_Examination_of_Limon_v._Kansas_in_Light_of_Lawrence_v._Texas See profile at] [[ResearchGate]].
+* {{cite magazine |last = Schvartzman |first = Shulamit H. |url  = http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1201&context=shlr |title = 'Romeo and Romeo": An Examination of ''Limon v. Kansas'' in Light of ''Lawrence v. Texas''  |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160305001244/http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1201&context=shlr |archive-date = March 5, 2016 |url-status = live |magazine = [[Seton Hall Law Review]] |volume = 35 |year = 2004 |pages =  359–401 }} ([https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238052156_Romeo_and_Romeo_An_Examination_of_Limon_v._Kansas_in_Light_of_Lawrence_v._Texas See profile at] [[ResearchGate]].)
-* "[https://www.aclu.org/news/romeo-juliet-law-gives-gay-teen-16-years-more-prison-heterosexual-would-serve 'Romeo & Juliet Law' Gives Gay Teen 16 Years More In Prison than Heterosexual Would Serve]" ([http://www.webcitation.org/6bdW5zwyE Archive]). [[American Civil Liberties Union]]. September 28, 2001.
+* {{cite press release |url =  https://www.aclu.org/news/romeo-juliet-law-gives-gay-teen-16-years-more-prison-heterosexual-would-serve |title = 'Romeo & Juliet Law' Gives Gay Teen 16 Years More in Prison than Heterosexual Would Serve |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150425004434/https://www.aclu.org/news/romeo-juliet-law-gives-gay-teen-16-years-more-prison-heterosexual-would-serve |archive-date = April 25, 2015  |url-status =  live |publisher = [[American Civil Liberties Union]] |date = September 28, 2001 }}
+{{refend}}
 ==External links==
+* {{caselaw source
-*[http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14536691492268474029&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr Kansas Supreme Court Opinion]
+ | case = ''State v. Limon'', 280 Kan. 275, 122 P.3d 22 (2005)
+ | courtlistener =https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2576319/state-v-limon/
+ | googlescholar = https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14536691492268474029
+ }}
-[[Category:United States LGBT rights case law]]
+[[Category:United States LGBTQ rights case law]]
 [[Category:Sexuality and age]]
 [[Category:Kansas state case law]]
 [[Category:2005 in United States case law]]
 [[Category:2005 in Kansas]]
+[[Category:United States equal protection case law]]
+[[Category:LGBTQ in Kansas]]
+[[Category:2005 in LGBTQ history]]