Opinion ID: 1716246
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Oral Copulation

Text: The defendant likewise contends that Count 2 of the bill of information was insufficient to charge a crime against nature, in that it alleged only that the defendant did place his mouth upon the penis of the victim. The defendant contends that penetration is likewise an essential element of the crime against nature of the oral-genital nature. In the first place, if this were a deficiency in the indictment, it is of a nature of insufficient detail in the description of the crime rather than total failure to charge any crime: The indictment's language is susceptible to the construction that it encompassed penetration of the mouth by the sexual organ, and it clearly gave notice to the accused of the charge against him and adequately protects him against double jeopardy by re-trial for the conduct charged. An attack upon the indictment for technical deficiencies of this nature may not be made for the first time after the jury verdict. State v. James, 305 So.2d 514 (La.1974). [5] However, we prefer to rest our decision upon a broader rationale. Oral-genital conduct punished by the crime-against-nature statute was first criminally prohibited by an 1896 amendment proscribing unnatural copulation committed with the mouth. See footnote 3. Despite dicta in State v. Long, 133 La. 580, 63 So. 180 (1913) that penetration is required, the weight of the jurisprudence is against such a restrictive interpretation of the statutory meaning. The jurisprudential interpretation of the oral-genital copulation proscribed by the crime against nature statute in its present version is that any actual joining or connection of a genital organ of one person and the mouth of another constitutes the crime. State v. Young, 249 La. 1053, 193 So.2d 243, 245 (1966). See also State v. Lindsey, 310 So.2d 89, 92 (La.1975). Accordingly, we find no merit to the contention that the oral-genital conduct charged by Count 2 did not constitute the crime against nature statutorily proscribed.