The California Court of Appeals has ruled that a woman whose alleged rape by Stanford University professor Geoffrey Kingsley in the early 2000s is at the center of a $300,000 legal fight should have a hearing to determine whether she is entitled to a jury trial.
The ruling comes in the case of Jennifer W. Smith, who was convicted of rape in 2014 but is now suing Kingsley, alleging he assaulted her during a party at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
Kingsley was a visiting professor of neuroscience at Caltech and a professor of mathematics and physics at Stanford University when Smith and her friends were allegedly invited to a party.
Smith’s attorney, Michael D. Laskowski, argued in a lawsuit that Smith was not a student and that she should have had a jury jury trial because she was not present at the party.
But the state’s highest court disagreed, saying that Kingsley had consented to having the women have sex with him.
Smith is now seeking a jury verdict in the criminal case, arguing that she is a victim of a crime against nature, a common element of rape allegations.
She also claims that she suffered emotional distress, lost a job and is now unemployed.
In a decision that could have major implications for other rape cases, the appellate court wrote that the California Penal Code makes rape an offense under which a person is guilty of a felony if they have sex against a person who is incapable of giving consent.
The California courts have been split on whether to apply that law to the case.
A California Supreme Court decision last year held that Kingsmanns conduct amounted to rape.
The Supreme Court’s ruling was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, but it was not heard by the Supreme Court until March of this year.
The decision comes just two months after the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that rape victims cannot sue their assailants because of their “capacity” to consent.
The California Supreme Judicial Supreme Court has held that a rape victim’s capacity to consent does not determine whether the defendant’s conduct constituted rape.
In a recent ruling, the court ruled that it was appropriate to consider a defendant’s capacity for consent when determining whether his conduct was rape.
In the Kingsley case, a California appeals court ruled last year that Kingsby’s sexual activity with Smith and others was a crime, which should be subject to the law.
Kingsley was not charged with rape, but the court did find that Smith’s actions in consenting to sex were “fraught with danger.”
Kingsley’s lawyer said that the case is about a woman who was assaulted by a professor, and that he is entitled, in his own words, to a trial.
Luskowski has said he plans to appeal the court’s ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Smith was convicted in 2014 on charges of forcible rape, unlawful restraint and unlawful sexual intercourse.
She was sentenced to four years in prison and five years of supervised release.
The case is currently being heard by Judge Michael Laskowski of the California Court Of Appeal.
He could not immediately be reached for comment.