mens rea and public welfare

People v. Jensen ,Michigan Court of Appeals No 210655, (1998)

The defendant in this case was charged with three counts of knowing that she was HIV positive in the case of People v. Jensen, 222 Mich. App 575; 564 NW2d 192 (1997)

She was found guilty of engaging in sexual penetration with a partner without informing them of her HIV infection based on MCL 333.5210; MSA 14.15(5210) and was sentenced to concurrent terms of two years and eight months to four years imprisonment on each of the three counts.

The defendant in this case argues that MCL 333.5210; MSA 14.15(5210) is unconstitutional because it does not specify that an intent or mens rea is required. She also argues that because the statute does not specify and intent to harm, one who does not understand the consequences of their actions cannot be found criminally responsible.

The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the conviction handed down to the defendant in her trial.

The court finds that knowingly engaging in sexual conduct without informing the partner of the risks they are taking is the culpable state of mind that can lead to the partner’s death. In the case of People v. Lardie,452 Mich 231,256;551 MW2d 656 (1996) the Supreme Court found that a person who operates a vehicle while intoxicated can be held criminally responsible for causing the death of another, based on the fact they knew they were intoxicated while driving, even without a specific intent to cause harm. The court has used the same rationale to uphold their decision here in this case of People v. Jensen.

I support the decision of the court in this case. If a person who is HIV infected is going to engage in sexual penetration with another, they should understand that there is a chance of causing that person to become infected with the deadly virus. In the interest of public welfare I believe that state statutes are constitutional in banning an infected person from engaging in sexual penetration without notifying the partner of the risks involved.