Commonwealth v. Urban

Martin Urban (defendant) was prosecuted for rape after having sex with a woman who was intoxicated; the Commonwealth argued her intoxication made her incapable of consenting, while Urban argued she remained sober enough to and did validly consent. Over Urban's objection, the trial judge instructed the jury that sex with a person who is asleep, intoxicated, stupefied, unconscious, or helpless is deemed to occur without valid consent; the jury convicted Urban, and he appealed.