## Facts

- Randy Jay Goldberg, age 25, approached an 18-year-old high school senior who worked part-time as a sales clerk and told her he was a freelance modeling agent.
- Goldberg persuaded her to meet him after her shift so he could take her to his “studio” for a modeling interview; when she asked for identification, he showed his driver’s license.
- She left with him in a Cadillac. After stopping at locations described as possible “temporary studios,” Goldberg brought her to an apartment and led her into a bedroom.
- In the bedroom, Goldberg continued to represent that the meeting was related to modeling and talked the young woman into removing her clothing as part of the “interview.”
- The victim testified she was scared, repeatedly said she did not want to do anything with him, and said she wanted to leave. Goldberg repeatedly told her to relax and that he would not hurt her.
- She testified Goldberg got her onto the bed, got on top of her, and had sexual intercourse while she cried, told him “no,” and tried to squeeze her legs together.
- On cross-examination, she qualified her earlier statement that he “pushed” her down, testifying that he did not push but “guided” her onto the bed. She reported no physical injury, and the physician’s findings regarding force were negative.
- Goldberg drove her home afterward. She later told a friend what happened, and friends encouraged her to report to police.
- Goldberg was arrested and charged with second-degree rape. At trial, he admitted intercourse but testified it was consensual and that she never appeared frightened.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove second-degree rape under Md. Code art. 27, § 463(a)(1), including the element that intercourse was accomplished by force or threat of force.
2. Whether the trial court should have declared a mistrial on its own motion based on events at trial.
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress an oral statement Goldberg made at the time of arrest.

## Decision

- The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland reversed Goldberg’s second-degree rape conviction.
- The court held the State’s evidence was legally insufficient to prove the required element of force or threat of force.
- Because the conviction was reversed for insufficiency, the remaining appellate complaints (mistrial and suppression) did not affect the outcome.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory sexual-offense provisions that use common-law rape terms (such as “force” or “threat of force”) carry their judicially established meaning unless the statute changes that meaning.
- For rape, force is an essential element: the evidence must support either (a) resistance overcome by force or (b) threats to the victim’s safety that prevented resistance; the required amount of force depends on the circumstances, and actual physical force is not always required.
- Fear and nonconsent, without evidence of force or a threat of force that prevented resistance, do not satisfy the force/threat element required for second-degree rape under § 463(a)(1).
- When reviewing sufficiency, an appellate court evaluates whether the evidence, viewed most favorably to the State, could permit a rational factfinder to find each element beyond a reasonable doubt; if an element is missing as a matter of law, the conviction cannot stand.

## Conclusion

Goldberg’s conviction for second-degree rape was reversed because, even accepting the complainant’s account of fear, protest, and nonconsent, the record did not contain legally sufficient proof that intercourse was accomplished by force or by a threat of force as required by Md. Code art. 27, § 463(a)(1).


Goldberg v. State, 41 Md. App. 58 (1979)