<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>INSTRUCTIONS: In prosecution for third-degree sexual abuse, trial court correctly<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>refused to give defendant’s requested instruction that the state had to prove that he “knew”<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>the victim did not consent to the sexual contact.<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i>State v. Anderson</i></b>, 264 Or App __, __ P3d __ (July 30, 2014) (Multnomah) (AAIC Jamie<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Contreras). Defendant groped a stranger on a MAX train and was charged with third-degree<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">sexual abuse. At trial, he requested a special jury instruction that “a knowing
<i>mens rea </i>ought to<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">attach” to the “lack of consent” element of the crime. The trial court (Judge Kelly Skye) refused<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">to give that instruction, and the jury found defendant guilty.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>HELD</i>: Affirmed (Garrett, J.). The trial court correctly refused to give the instruction.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Although the state must prove that defendant had a culpable mental state with respect to the<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">victim’s lack of consent, the state need not prove that defendant acted “knowingly”—only that<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">he “acted, at a minimum, with criminal negligence with respect to lack of consent.”
<i>State v.<o:p></o:p></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Wier</i>, 206 Or App 341, 352-53 (2013). Defendant’s requested instruction was “precisely the<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">instruction that [the court] rejected in <i>Wier</i>,” so the trial court correctly refused to give it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A152945.pdf">http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A152945.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt">**The <u>Anderson</u> case follows
<u>State v. Wier</u> from last year. In <u>Wier</u>, the Defendant appealed his convictions for first and third degree sexual abuse. The first degree charge was reversed/remanded. The third degree charge was affirmed.
<b>The court’s reasoning</b>: The first degree sex abuse statute does not ‘’explicity prescribe a culpable mental state…but a culpable mental state is nevertheless required by ORS 161.115(2).” ORS 161.095 outlines which elements of each crime require proof
a culpable mental state. “Under ORS 161.095(2), unless the legislature expressly provides otherwise, a culpable mental state is required for all facts that the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to convict a defendant except those that relate solely
to the statute of limitations, jurisdiction, venue, or other procedural prerequisites to conviction.” The court relied upon an earlier case,
<u>State v. Nelson</u> wherein it held that subjection of the victim to forcible compulsion (for Sex Abuse I) is such an element and requires a culpable mental state. The
<u>Nelson</u> court determined that ‘knowingly’ or ‘with knowledge’ was the correct mental state for that particular element.
<u>Wier</u> affirmed the Anderson reasoning by concluding that “forcible compulsion” is a ‘conduct’ element of the (Sex Abuse I) crime and
<b>only </b>the culpable mental states of “intentionally” or “knowingly” can apply to a conduct element. On the other hand, the court reasoned, the “lack of consent” element for the Sex Abuse III crime is a “circumstantial element of the crime,” and thus only
requires, at a minimum, criminal negligence. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i>State v. Wier</i></b>, 260 Or App __, __ P3d __ (December 26, 2013) (Lane) (AAG Karla<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ferrall). <b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>For the first-degree charge</b>, defendant requested a special jury instruction that would have<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">instructed the jury that it had to find that he knowingly subjected the victim to forcible<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">compulsion. <b>On the third-degree charge</b>, defendant requested a special jury instruction that<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">would have instructed the jury that it had to find that he knew that the victim did not consent.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The trial court (Judge Jack Billings) declined to give the special instructions, and defendant was
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">found guilty.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Held</i>: Conviction for first-degree sexual abuse reversed and remanded; remanded for<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">resentencing; otherwise affirmed (Duncan, J.). [1] The trial court erred when it refused to give<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">defendant’s proposed instruction on first-degree sexual abuse, because the instruction would<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">have correctly informed the jury that the state had to prove that he knowingly subjected the first<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">victim to forcible compulsion. [2] The trial court did not err in refusing to give defendant’s<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">proposed instruction on third-degree sexual abuse because the instruction incorrectly stated that<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">the state had to prove that he acted knowingly with respect to the second victim’s lack of<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">consent. ORS 163.415 requires the state to prove that he acted knowingly, recklessly, or with<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">criminal negligence with respect to a victim’s lack of consent, and the allegations in the<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">indictment did not compel the state to prove “knowingly.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A147209.pdf">http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A147209.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Erin S. Greenawald<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sr. Assistant Attorney General<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Domestic Violence Resource Prosecutor<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Oregon Department of Justice <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Criminal Justice Division<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(503) 378-6340<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<DIV>
*****CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE*****<BR>
<BR>
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system. <BR>
<BR>
************************************<BR>
</DIV></body>
</html>