Opinion ID: 1902904
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: did the circuit court err in drawing a distinction between forcible rape and statutory rape in consideration of the requirement of a jury's recommendation necessary for the imposition of a sentence of life imprisonment?

Text: ¶ 13. Steen argues that the circuit court erred in drawing a distinction between his case and the appellants in Luckett v. State, 582 So.2d 428 (Miss.1991); Cunningham v. State, 467 So.2d 902 (Miss. 1985); and Lee v. State, 322 So.2d 751 (Miss.1975). Steen argues that he was charged with statutory rape while the above appellants were charged with forcible rape. ¶ 14. Steen was charged with rape of a child under the age of under fourteen years of age. This can be distinguished from forcible rape. Forcible rape is defined as forcible sexual intercourse with any person. Age is the defining characteristic between capital rape and forcible rape. The victim in this case was seven years old. The sentences imposed for these two distinct crimes are different. Therefore, the circuit court did not err in drawing a distinction between forcible rape and statutory rape. This assignment of error is without merit.