Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition that challenged constitutionality of Indiana statute that made it crime for anyone who “has or had” professional relation with person under age of 18 to “use or exert the person’s professional relationship to engage in sexual intercourse.” Defendant was convicted on said charge, under circumstances where defendant, who was 17-year-old victim’s assistant high school basketball coach, promised victim to coach her one on-one and to help her obtain basketball scholarship, and then had sexual relationship with victim. Ct of Appeals observed that there was no ex post facto violation in defendant’s prosecution on said charge, even though defendant had resigned his coaching position prior to enactment of said statute, where defendant seduced victim after enactment of statute by using influence gained from his coaching position. Ct. further found that statute was not impermissibly vague, and that defendant had failed to identify any U.S. Supreme Ct. precedent that clearly established invalidity of said statute.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Habeas Corpus