## Facts

- Raymond Lennard Garnett, age 20, had significant intellectual limitations (IQ 52; third-grade reading level; social functioning described as similar to an 11–12-year-old).
- Garnett met Erica Frazier, age 13, and spoke with her by telephone.
- On February 28, 1991, Garnett entered Erica’s bedroom through a window and the two engaged in vaginal intercourse.
- Erica gave birth on November 19, 1991; Garnett was the biological father.
- The intercourse was factually consensual, and Garnett proffered that Erica and her friends told him she was 16 and that he believed it.
- Maryland law criminalized vaginal intercourse with a person under 14 when the actor is at least four years older than the victim.

## Issues

1. Whether second-degree rape under Md. Code art. 27, § 463(a)(3) requires proof of a culpable mental state regarding the victim’s being under 14.
2. Whether an honest or reasonable mistake of age is a defense to § 463(a)(3).
3. Whether the trial court erred by excluding evidence that the complainant represented she was older and that the defendant believed it, including in light of the defendant’s cognitive limitations.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed the conviction.
- Section 463(a)(3) imposes strict liability as to the victim’s age; the State need not prove the defendant knew or should have known the victim was under 14.
- No mistake-of-age defense is available under § 463(a)(3).
- Because mistake of age is legally irrelevant, the trial court properly excluded evidence that the complainant said she was 16 and that the defendant believed it.

## Legal Principles

- When a statute includes an express knowledge requirement in one subsection but omits it in another, the omission can indicate legislative intent not to require mens rea for the omitted element.
- Second-degree rape under § 463(a)(3) requires proof only that (1) vaginal intercourse occurred, (2) the victim was under 14, and (3) the actor was at least four years older.
- Under § 463(a)(3), consent in fact and a defendant’s mistaken belief about the victim’s age do not negate guilt.
- Courts will not judicially add a mens rea or mistake-of-age defense where statutory text, structure, and legislative history indicate strict liability; any change is for the legislature.

## Conclusion

The court held that Maryland’s under-14 second-degree rape provision is a strict-liability offense as to age, making mistake of age inadmissible and not a defense, and affirmed Garnett’s conviction despite evidence of his belief that the victim was older and his intellectual limitations.


Garnett v. State, 332 Md. 571, 632 A.2d 797 (Md. 1993)