XGW has previously commented on the Matthew Limon case:
June 28: Gay Teenager’s Prison Term Voided
Sept. 17: Kansas AG Distorts, Misleads, Inflames
Oct. 1: Focus/Family Wants Gay Kid Imprisoned 17 Years
On Dec. 3, the Lawrence, Kan., Journal-World reported:
Judge ridicules underage sex law
State’s harsher sentences for homosexual partners criticized in appellate hearing
A three-judge appeals panel heard arguments in the case of Matthew R. Limon, who was sentenced to 17 years in prison for engaging in homosexual sex with a minor. Limon was 18 years old when he was convicted in 2000 of having oral sex with a 14-year-old boy at a private group home for people with developmental disabilities in Paola.
Under state law, if Limon had engaged in sex with an underage girl, he would have faced a maximum sentence of one year and three months in prison.
“I’m just trying to come up with a reason, other than you don’t like homosexuals,” Kansas Court of Appeals Judge Joseph Pierron told Deputy Atty. Gen. Jared Maag, who was representing the state.
But Maag said the state Legislature had broad authority to approve of such disparities in sentencing in order to promote “traditional sexual roles.”
The state argued the reasons for different punishments of similar sex acts was to promote marriage, encourage procreation and prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
Maag does not explain how sentencing a teen-ager to spend most of his life in prison promotes marriage, procreation, or sexual health.
What would I pay for a transcript of this case. I wonder if it is like the recording of Roe V. Wade I heard years ago. The only argument the supporters of the law gave in that case was tradition and appealing to tradition is usually a weak argument.
If appealing to tradition were a viable argument, Plessy v. Ferguson would still be good law. Or the Dred Scott Decision, for that matter.
Don’t know if this is helpful, as it’s not a transcript. But here’s the complete text fo the ruling:
https://www.kscourts.org/kscases/ctapp/2004/20040130/85898.htm
Meladora,
Thank you for commenting.
XGW coverage of the appellate court ruling is available here and here.
Matthew Limon was already a registered sex offender. Homosexual or heterosexual, either way, he deserved years in prison, not months.
Unfortunately for this “Mike” character, from what I had read, Limon was not sentenced for having sex with a minor while being a registered sex offender. If the recent US Supreme Court is any indication, the judge would have been forbidden from imposing a more severe sentence based on facts that had not been found by the jury.
Quite frankly, given the circumstances of the Limon case, if Limon really was a “registered sex offender,” as Mike suggests, the management of the institution in which he was incarcerated deserve years in prison for endangering a minor. For that matter, two minors, mentally speaking. Both the minor that Limon was convicted of having had sex with, and Limon himself.