Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 45. CRIMES · CHAPTER 5. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON · Part 5. Sexual Crimes
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511 (2026)

Provisions Generally Applicable To Sexual Crimes

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 45
  3. CHAPTER 5
  4. Part 5
  5. 45-5-511 Provisions generally applicable to sexual crimes

TITLE 45. CRIMES

CHAPTER 5. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON

Part 5. Sexual Crimes

Provisions Generally Applicable To Sexual Crimes

45-5-511. Provisions generally applicable to sexual crimes. (1) When criminality depends on the victim being less than 16 years old, it is a defense for the offender to prove that the offender reasonably believed the child to be above that age. The belief may not be considered reasonable if the child is less than 14 years old.

(2) Evidence concerning the sexual conduct of the victim is inadmissible in prosecutions under this part except evidence of the victim's past sexual conduct with the offender or evidence of specific instances of the victim's sexual activity to show the origin of semen, pregnancy, or disease that is at issue in the prosecution.

(3) If the defendant proposes for any purpose to offer evidence described in subsection (2), the trial judge shall order a hearing out of the presence of the jury to determine whether the proposed evidence is admissible under subsection (2).

(4) Evidence of failure to make a timely complaint or immediate outcry does not raise any presumption as to the credibility of the victim.

(5) Resistance by the victim is not required to show lack of consent. Force, fear, or threat is sufficient alone to show lack of consent.

History: En. 94-5-506 by Sec. 1, Ch. 513, L. 1973; amd. Sec. 17, Ch. 359, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 94-5-506; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 407, L. 1979; MCA 1981, 45-5-506; redes. 45-5-511 by Code Commissioner, 1983; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 172, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 425, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 6, Ch. 687, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 1658, Ch. 56, L. 2009.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 71 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: State v. B. Daffin, 2017 MT 76 (Mont. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. B. Daffin, 2017 MT 76 (Mont. 2017). · cites it 16× “Did the District Court err in applying § 45-5-511(2), MCA, Montana’s Rape Shield Law? FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 On January 9,2014, R.”
State v. Colburn, 2016 MT 41 (Mont. 2016). · cites it 26× “” The statute provides two narrowly-drawn exceptions: (1) evidence of past sexual conduct with the defendant, and (2) evidence of specific instances of the victim’s sexual activity to show the origin of semen, pregnancy, or disease that is at issue in the prosecution.”
State Ex Rel. Mazurek v. Dist. Court of Montana Fourth Jud. Dist., 922 P.2d 474 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 42× “A later decision of this Court would be wholly ineffective in rectifying the injury to the victim.”
State v. Aguado, 2017 MT 54 (Mont. 2017). · cites it 16× “rict Court granted the State’s motion, reasoning that Aguado’s offer of proof did not “rebut, contextualize, or explain” the statements made during the phone call and that “the evidence appears primarily to be directed at sullying the victim’s character by painting her an overly…”
State v. Walker, 433 P.3d 202 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 16× “Did the District Court correctly apply Montana's Rape Shield Law, § 45-5-511(2), MCA, to exclude evidence of a victim's alleged prior sexual conduct? ¶ 2 We affirm.”
State v. Awbery, 2016 MT 48 (Mont. 2016). · cites it 16× “The State relied upon the exclusions of the Rape Shield Law, § 45-5-511, MCA. The apparent perpetrator against A.”
State v. Detonancour, 2001 MT 213 (Mont. 2001). · cites it 12× “¶ 20 Montana's rape shield law, codified at § 45-5-511, MCA, provides in relevant part: (2) No evidence concerning the sexual conduct of the victim is admissible in prosecutions under this part except evidence of the victim's past sexual conduct with the offender or evidence of…”
State v. Ahto, 1998 MT 200 (Mont. 1998). · cites it 32× “In reviewing a district court's decision regarding the admissibility of evidence relating to the extrinsic sexual conduct of sexual assault victims under § 45-5-511, MCA, we determine whether the district court abused its discretion.”
State v. Lindberg, 2008 MT 389 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 9× “H was necessary for him to present his defense theory. ¶11 The District Court granted the State’s motion in limine, concluding that any evidence of the sexual nature of H.”
State v. MacKinnon, 1998 MT 78 (Mont. 1998). · cites it 12× “when she was an infant pursuant to Montana's rape shield statute, § 45-5-511(2), MCA. Furthermore, the State contends that on the *30 basis of Rules 401, 403 and 608(b), M.”
State v. Van Pelt, 805 P.2d 549 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 18× “Whether the District Court erred in granting the State’s motion in limine which precluded the introduction of evidence under § 45-5-511(4), MCA. Charles Van Pelt, Jr.”
State v. Van Pelt, 805 P.2d 549 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 18× “Whether the District Court erred in granting the State's motion in limine which precluded the introduction of evidence under § 45-5-511(4), MCA. Charles Van Pelt, Jr.”
Show all 71 citing cases →
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(1) — 4 cases
Fleming, Mark Alexander, 455 S.W.3d 577 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
Garnett v. State, 632 A.2d 797 (Md. 1993).
State v. Muir, 867 P.2d 1094 (Mont. 1994).
Lechner v. State, 715 N.E.2d 1285 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(2) — 36 cases
State v. B. Daffin, 2017 MT 76 (Mont. 2017). “Did the District Court err in applying § 45-5-511(2), MCA, Montana’s Rape Shield Law? FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 On January 9,2014, R.”
State Ex Rel. Mazurek v. Dist. Court of Montana Fourth Jud. Dist., 922 P.2d 474 (Mont. 1996). “A later decision of this Court would be wholly ineffective in rectifying the injury to the victim.”
State v. Aguado, 2017 MT 54 (Mont. 2017). “rict Court granted the State’s motion, reasoning that Aguado’s offer of proof did not “rebut, contextualize, or explain” the statements made during the phone call and that “the evidence appears primarily to be directed at sullying the victim’s character by painting her an overly…”
State v. Colburn, 2016 MT 41 (Mont. 2016). “” The statute provides two narrowly-drawn exceptions: (1) evidence of past sexual conduct with the defendant, and (2) evidence of specific instances of the victim’s sexual activity to show the origin of semen, pregnancy, or disease that is at issue in the prosecution.”
State v. Walker, 433 P.3d 202 (Mont. 2018). “Did the District Court correctly apply Montana's Rape Shield Law, § 45-5-511(2), MCA, to exclude evidence of a victim's alleged prior sexual conduct? ¶ 2 We affirm.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(3) — 1 case
Rodriguez v. State, 2026 MT 35N (Mont. 2026).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(4) — 10 cases
State v. Van Pelt, 805 P.2d 549 (Mont. 1991). “Whether the District Court erred in granting the State’s motion in limine which precluded the introduction of evidence under § 45-5-511(4), MCA. Charles Van Pelt, Jr.”
State v. Van Pelt, 805 P.2d 549 (Mont. 1991). “Whether the District Court erred in granting the State's motion in limine which precluded the introduction of evidence under § 45-5-511(4), MCA. Charles Van Pelt, Jr.”
State v. Rhyne, 833 P.2d 1112 (Mont. 1992).
State v. Kao, 800 P.2d 714 (Mont. 1990).
State v. Gerstner, 2009 MT 303 (Mont. 2009).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(4)(b) — 1 case
State v. Laird, 732 P.2d 417 (Mont. 1987).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(5) — 2 cases
State v. Haser, 2001 MT 6 (Mont. 2001).
State v. R. Lerman, 2018 MT 5 (Mont. 2018).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-511(7) — 1 case
State v. Goodwin, 813 P.2d 953 (Mont. 1991).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.