When Teachers Have Sex With Students

February 8, 2017

By Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

jeremy@texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Texas criminalizes an “Improper Relationship Between Educator and Student” in Texas Penal Code 21.12.  It is a 2nd Degree Felony Carrying between a 2 and 20 year jail sentence upon conviction.

These cases tend to be news-worthy and create a loud splash every time they occur.  Along with the publicity come the humiliation, shame, and feelings of helplessness for the accused and their loved ones.

A Broad Dragnet of a Law

The central problem with the law is its breadth… this is to say its sweeping nature.

Think about it this way — Everyone agrees it would be reprehensible for a teacher (regardless of age) to have sexual contact in the classroom with a student they teach in the 4th grade. But what about if an 18 year old student (over the age of consent) has sexual relations with say a cafeteria worker, janitor, or even a teacher at a private residence — and the school employee has no regular supervision or contact with the student while at school?  In other words — sex between two consenting adults.

This statute is a dragnet which treats both instances the same.

A major distinction between the two scenarios is the abuse of the child under the age of 14 would be a separate offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child or indecency with a child and could still be prosecuted as such.  The latter would otherwise not be a crime at all but for Section 21.12.

How Courts Have Analyzed This Law

A round of cases after this law was passed actually challenged the constitutionality of the improper relationship between educator and student for this reason.  At least one trial Court found the statute to be facially unconstitutional before an appellate court reversed it.  See e.g. Ex Parte Morales, 212 S.W.3d 483, (Tex.App. — Austin, 2006).

In a recent case limiting the scope of the law, a Court of Appeals actually acquit a person originally convicted by a jury because as a police officer employed by the school district’s PD, he was not an “employee” of the school even though part of his responsibilities would have been to assist at the school if needed.  See State v. Sutton, 499 S.W.3d 434 (Tex.Crim.App.– 2016).

Defending These Charges

Defending charges of improper relationships between an educator and a student takes a lot of diligence and creativity.  Obviously if the sexual relationship and/or contact itself can be contested or challenged this should be done.  If the facts seem difficult then the attorney should be prepared to lodge more creative challenges.

The Sutton opinion demonstrates even the Court’s discomfort with how broadly this law can be applied – or misapplied.  If jurors share the same sentiment then challenging these cases in trial could yield positive results.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas and has been designated as a Texas Super Lawyer By Thomson Reuters.

 


Why We Defend Sex Crime Allegations

June 3, 2016

By Collin County Criminal Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

We defend sex cases because injustice turns our stomachs.

Everyone feels the need to protect the innocent and vulnerable victims of sex crimes.  Who doesn’t feel like running through a wall to protect someone from such an atrocity?  But those strong emotions can easily go out of balance and out of whack and can ultimately blind us to the fundamental issue of whether the allegation is true to begin with.

Sex crime allegations have the possibility to be emotionally fueled rather than factually fueled more than practically any other crime – especially if a child is alleged to be the victim.  As a result it there is a potential for life-alterning unfairness.

Many sex crime allegations lack fundamental physical evidence you might see in a drug case, dwi case, or an assault case.  It makes sex cases harder to prove — and much, much harder to defend.  In addition, law enforcement are highly polished in how they present evidence and are able to spin neutral facts or facts in the accused favor against the accused.

Our clients and their families constantly ask us how or why law enforcement is so selective about the facts they choose to believe, why they are deaf to facts which contradict what they believe, and why they reject logic inconsistent with what they believe.  The answer is more simple than we’d like.  It isn’t because they’re bad people… It is because they’ve made up their mind.

Debating them about the facts can be like trying to convince someone they’re wrong about religion, politics or their favorite football team.  It’s not going to work often.  But the good news is we still live in America – and the police don’t get the ultimate decision on whether you or your loved one is guilty.

Fighting injustice to a jury is a hard thing to do.  It takes hard work, attention to detail, and mastering the facts better than your opponent.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article should be considered legal advice.  For legal advice about any situation you should consult an attorney directly.