Prohibited Acts

Reporter’s Note

Lewd Act/Prohibited Conduct. In In re K.A., 2016 VT 52, ¶ 21, 202 Vt. 86, the Supreme Court declared that lewdness not “relating to prostitution” was not an operative offense under 13 V.S.A. § 2632(a)(8). However, the Legislature amended the statute in 2017 to establish lewdness not related to prostitution as an offense. See 13 V.S.A. § 2601a. The model instruction for lewdness, CR27-046, is available on the Lewd and Lascivious Conduct page of this website.

Engaging in Prostitution.  The model instruction for engaging in prostitution, 13 V.S.A. § 2632(a)(8), focuses on “the offering or receiving of the body for sexual intercourse for hire,” under § 2631.  The committee is not aware of any prosecution under that section for “the offering or receiving of the body for indiscriminate sexual intercourse without hire.”  The committee’s understanding is that the statutory reference to “sexual intercourse” is limited to the insertion of a man’s erect penis into a woman’s vagina.  See The Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus (American Edition 1996), at 1388.  The scope of the statute is limited to the ordinary meaning of the term, under the rule of lenity.  This interpretation is consistent with the discussion of prostitution in State v. George, 157 Vt. 580 (1991).

Inducing Female to Live Life of Prostitution.  This instruction, like the instruction for “engaging in prostitution,” focuses on sexual intercourse for hire.  A prosecution for inducing a female to engage in indiscriminate sexual intercourse without hire is unlikely.  Compare State v. Corologos, 101 Vt. 300 (1928) (prosecution for indiscriminate sale of ice cream and beverages on Sunday).

Comments are closed.