Plas v. State

Plas v. State - language HOLDING Yes RATIONALE In assessing...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PROSTITUTION Plas v. State FACTS: On June 19 th 1976, Debbie Plas was charged by an Alaska with soliciting for the prostitution in violation of AS 11.40.230 which reads, “It is unlawful within the state to procure or solicit for the purpose of prostitution” and AS 11.40.210 which reads, “Prostitution includes the giving or receiving of the body by a female for sexual intercourse for hire.” On April 20, 1977, appellants Farrell and Ross were charged with the same violation. A motion to dismiss was denied on the grounds that the statute was unconstitutional. Farrell and Ross unsuccessfully sought reversal in the superior court and petition to the Supreme Court of Alaska. ISSUE: Are the statutes AS 11.40.210-230. unconstitutional because of their statutory
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: language? HOLDING: Yes RATIONALE: In assessing equal protection claims in the Alaska Constitution, you must consider the legislative objective and determine if the means chosen substantially further the goals of the enactment. The statute invidiously discriminates against females because a male can commit the same offense, but it not made criminal by the statute. In criminal offenses, any distinctions as to gender must rest upon some logical justification having a basis in the actual conditions of human life. The clause “by a female” violates the Alaska constitution, but be balance of the statute remains legally intact....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/05/2011 for the course JLS 535 taught by Professor Siser during the Fall '10 term at American.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online