Four of the seven judges determined that the case had not been a binding precedent, meaning that Maryland law all along has been that rape includes instances where permission is given but later taken away.
"We conclude that post-penetration withdrawal of consent negates initial consent for the purposes of sexual offense crimes and, when coupled with the other elements, may constitute the crime of rape," Judge Lynne A. Battaglia wrote in the majority opinion.
Judge Irma S. Raker and two others found that the 1980 ruling had been binding - but that it should be overturned.
That divergence, plus a lengthy recitation of the history of common law and a discussion of other appellate issues, added up to 76 pages.
Meg Garvin, director of programs for the Oregon-based National Crime Victim Institute, which filed a brief in the matter, said that while she was pleased with the court's opinion, she worried that its message might get lost in the tide of words.
"It would have been stronger and more easily digestible for the public if it had been shorter," she said. "A better answer would have been that a woman should be able to say no at any point in time and that we reject any common-law history to the contrary."
julie.bykowicz@baltsun.com
