Maryland Queen Anne's County Sexual Molestation Abuse Criminal Nature Lawyers Attorneys

CHRISTOPHER LARRY TRIBBITT v

CHRISTOPHER LARRY TRIBBITT v. STATE OF MARYLAND

COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND

March 13, 2008, Filed

During the 2003 through 2006 school years, Kylie, the victim, was a student in a physical education class taught by Tribbitt at a Queen Anne's County public middle school. Over this time, Tribbitt and the victim grew close. Tribbitt was a volleyball coach. Over the course of the volleyball season, Tribbitt touched Kylie inappropriately on four or five occasions in the school's locker room and other places.

The trial court found that defendant improperly touched the victim in various incidents. Defendant was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor in violation of Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law 3-602 (2002, 2007 Cum. Supp.). The trial court sentenced defendant to 25 years in prison, with all but 18 months suspended, and five years of supervised probation.

Issue:

Whether the sexual abuse defined in Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law 3-602(a)(4), required that, in order to be convicted of a violation of the statute, a defendant's particular acts as found by the trial court must have been otherwise criminal in nature?

The Court held that the definition of "sexual abuse" is not limited to the crimes enumerated by 3-602(a)(4)(ii). 3-602(d)(1) provides further evidence that the Legislature did not intend to limit the definition of "sexual abuse" to otherwise criminal conduct. Section 3-602(d)(1) notes that an "act," not a "crime," may establish the basis for violation of the child sex abuse statute. Although it is unnecessary for the disposition of this case to consider legislative history because the plain language of the statute is unambiguous, we note that Tribbitt ignores the legislative history of subsection (d). The proper construction of the statute was that sexual abuse encompassed any act that involved sexual molestation or exploitation of a child. The definition of "sexual abuse" was not limited to the crimes enumerated by Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law 3-602(a)(4)(ii). Furthermore, Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law 3-602(d)(1) noted that an act, not a crime, could establish the basis for violation of the child sex abuse statute.

Conclusion:

Hence, this court affirmed the judgment of the intermediate court of appeals.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm's unofficial views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

Maryland Queen Anne's County Sexual Molestation Abuse Criminal Nature Lawyers Attorneys

By: Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

POST COMMENT

How divorce lawyers can help you Maryland Baltimore County Sexual Offense Charge Sodomy Lawyers Attorneys Montgomery No Substitute for an Encountered Divorce Lawyer How Lawyers Can Make Things Right For You Hiring an Accident Lawyer Charge Buildings Acceptable to Accident Lawyers Passing a Bar Exam: Guidelines for Future Lawyers to Succeed Plan Protection Early with an IP Lawyer Retirement Investing - Form of Ventures How to Modify Final Divorce Decrees with an Austin Divorce Lawyer Divorce Lawyers In Fredericksburg Va:the Marital Residence Divorce Lawyers Roanoke Va:marital Residence Investing in A Life After Retirement