Rhode Island General Laws
R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-10-1 (2026)
Abominable and detestable crime against nature
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Every person who shall be convicted of the abominable and detestable crime against nature, with any beast, shall be imprisoned not exceeding twenty (20) years nor less than seven (7) years.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 32
cases, 1962–2015 · leading case: State v. Lynch, 854 A.2d 1022 (R.I. 2004).
State v. Lynch, 854 A.2d 1022 (R.I. 2004). “1956 § 11-37-2, as well as for sodomy, under the then-existing version of G.L.1956 § 11-10-1. [5] Finally, as the trial justice noted, the statements were contrary to his pecuniary interest in the event that Mary became pregnant as a result of their sexual encounter.”
State v. Santos, 413 A.2d 58 (R.I. 1980). “We therefore find that the trial justice acted properly in closing the courtroom for the limited purpose of ensuring that the complainant would testify as accurately and under as little emotional stress as was possible.”
State v. Mullen, 740 A.2d 783 (R.I. 1999). “The appellant in this case, the State of Rhode Island, seeks review of the trial justice's ruling dismissing nine counts of an indictment against the defendant, Timothy Mullen, charging him with the abominable and detestable crime against nature pursuant to G.L.1956 § 11-10-1.…”
State v. Souza, 456 A.2d 775 (R.I. 1983). “1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 11-37-6 and § 11-10-1. We affirm the conviction for commission of the abominable and detestable crime against nature but, for reasons given below, must vacate the conviction for indecent assault.”
State v. Levitt, 371 A.2d 596 (R.I. 1977). “1956 (1969 Reenactment) §11-10-1, 2 on the ground that the general term “abominable and detestable crime against nature” used therein fails to describe the forbidden acts explicitly.”
State v. Lopes, 660 A.2d 707 (R.I. 1995). “1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-10-1. The trial justice granted defendant’s motion for arrest of judgment filed under Rule 34 of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure.”
State v. Castore, 435 A.2d 321 (R.I. 1981). “1 Castore faults the trial justice for ruling that the term “sodomy” was nothing more than surplusage and need not be established by the state under G.”
State v. McParlin, 422 A.2d 742 (R.I. 1980). “Etchells, in violation of § 11-10-1 of the G.L.R.I., 1956, as amended, (Reenactment of 1969).”
State v. Babbitt, 457 A.2d 1049 (R.I. 1983). “1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 11-37-1; six counts of committing the “abominable and detestable crime against nature,” in violation of § 11-10-1; and two counts of transporting “for the purposes of lewd and indecent acts,” in violation of § ll-34r-5.”
State v. Gibbons, 418 A.2d 830 (R.I. 1980). “1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 11-10-1 is unconstitutional because it is impermissibly vague and deprives them of their constitutional right of privacy.”
State v. DeMagistris, 714 A.2d 567 (R.I. 1998). “1956 § 11-1-9 and one count of a completed infraction of the crime against nature proscribed in G.L.1956 § 11-10-1. The second group charged the securing of an indecent act for pecuniary gain in violation of G.”
State v. Milne, 187 A.2d 136 (R.I. 1962). “1956, §11-10-1, fellatio has been made criminal whatever might be the circumstances in which it is committed.”
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.