Opinion
Court of Appeals No. A-10513.
October 19, 2011.
Appeal from the Superior Court, Second Judicial District, Kotzebue, Michael I. Jeffery, Judge, Trial Court No. 2KB-08-650 CR.
Dave Reineke, Assistant Public Defender, and Quinlan Steiner, Public Defender, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Tom V. Jamgochian, Assistant District Attorney, Nome, and John J. Burns, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.
Before: Coats, Chief Judge, and Mannheimer and Bolger, Judges.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
A jury convicted William T. Smith of attempted sexual assault in the second degree and attempted sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree for crawling into bed with a sleeping eleven-year-old girl, K.A., and putting his hand down the front of her pants. These offenses were merged at sentencing. Smith appeals his conviction, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to show that he intended to engage in sexual contact or sexual penetration with K.A. He specifically claims that evidence that he was intoxicated precluded a finding that he formed the requisite intent. He was also convicted of misconduct involving a controlled substance, but does not appeal this conviction. Because reasonable jurors could conclude that Smith's conscious objective was to engage in sexual penetration and sexual contact with the victim, we affirm Smith's conviction.
AS 11.41.420(a)(3); AS 11.31.100(a).
AS 11.41.436(a)(2); AS 11.31.100(a).
AS 11.71.060(a)(1).
Factual background
On the evening of the alleged assault, Smith went to K.A.'s house to drink with her father. K.A., her mother, and her sisters stayed in K.A.'s mother's bedroom throughout the evening and the night. Before they all went to sleep, K.A.'s mother locked the bedroom door by pushing a button in the knob from the inside of the bedroom.
K.A., her mother, and her two sisters fell asleep between 11:00 p.m. and midnight. K.A. and one of her sisters shared an army cot. At around 3:00 a.m., K.A. woke up when she felt someone reach down into her pants below her belly button. Her mother awoke when she heard K.A. say that somebody was trying to touch her. She turned the light on, and they saw Smith lying next to K.A. K.A. jumped out of bed and into her mother's bed. Her mother yelled at Smith to leave, and he said, "I thought I was crashing out." Smith looked for his belongings around the house, and finally left without his boots. K.A.'s mother testified that Smith did not appear that drunk.
K.A.'s mother described the lock on the door to her bedroom as a standard push-button doorknob lock. She testified that, earlier that evening, when Smith came over, her nephew had shown Smith how to pick that particular kind of lock by inserting a long, thin object into a small hole next to the doorknob.
K.A.'s mother reported the incident to the state troopers the following day. Trooper Main responded and flew out to the village. After interviewing K.A.'s mother and others in the home, Trooper Main located Smith at Smith's mother's house. This was about fourteen or fifteen hours after the time of the reported incident. Trooper Main testified that Smith was very intoxicated and hung over. Smith also had some marijuana on him. He was arrested and charged.
Discussion
There is sufficient evidence to affirm a conviction unless, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict, no reasonable juror could conclude that the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Dailey v. State, 65 P.3d 891, 898 (Alaska App. 2003) (citing Dorman v. State, 622 P.2d 448, 453 (Alaska 1981)).
Smith was convicted of attempted sexual assault in the second degree and attempted sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree. A person is guilty of sexual assault in the second degree if he "engages in sexual penetration with a person who the offender knows is" either "mentally incapable," "incapacitated," or "unaware that a sexual act is being committed." A person is guilty of sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree if, "being 16 years of age or older, the [person] engages in sexual contact with a person who is under 13 years of age." A person is guilty of attempt to commit a crime if, "with intent to commit a crime, the person engages in conduct which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of that crime."
AS 11.41.420(a)(3).
AS 11.41.436(a)(2).
AS 11.31.100(a).
Smith's argument on appeal is that he was too intoxicated to form the intent necessary to commit the crimes with which he was charged. A person "acts `intentionally' with respect to a result described by a provision of law defining an offense when the person's conscious objective is to cause that result." The question is therefore whether reasonable jurors could find that Smith's conscious objective was to engage in sexual penetration and sexual contact with K.A., or whether, to the contrary, no reasonable juror could possibly conclude that this was his conscious objective.
AS 11.81.900(a)(1).
K.A., her mother, and her two sisters spent the evening and night in K.A.'s mother's bedroom. Based on K.A.'s mother's testimony that she locked the bedroom door, that her nephew showed Smith how to pick the lock, and that Smith ended up in K.A.'s bed, it is reasonable to infer that Smith picked the lock to get to K.A. K.A. testified that Smith put his hand down the front of her pants. K.A.'s mother testified that, although it was dark, opening the bedroom door allowed the hallway light to shine onto the bed K.A. and her sister were in. This is sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude that Smith intentionally broke into the bedroom, lay down next to K.A., and put his hand down her pants. A reasonable inference from these actions is intent to penetrate and intent to engage in sexual contact.
Smith argues that the evidence that he was intoxicated precludes a finding of intent. Although "voluntary intoxication is not a defense[,] . . . evidence that the defendant was intoxicated may be offered whenever it is relevant to negate an element of the offense that requires that the defendant intentionally cause a result." Smith asserts that, because there was evidence that the men in the house were drinking heavily, "it is reasonable to assume that Smith was also extremely intoxicated to the point that he was not acting with specific intent." Although other men in the house were indeed passed out, Smith was not. K.A.'s mother and grandmother testified that he was not stumbling drunk and appeared to understand what was happening. K.A.'s mother believed that Smith "knew . . . exactly what he was doing." K.A.'s mother testified that Smith said he thought he was "crashing out" when K.A. and her mother found him in K.A.'s bed; but the jury could reasonably conclude that Smith was making excuses for being in K.A.'s bed at that time. A reasonable juror could conclude that Smith intended to engage in sexual contact and penetration with K.A. because he broke into a locked bedroom, lay down on a cot with two young girls sleeping in it, and put his hand down the front of the pants of one of the girls.
AS 11.81.630.
Conclusion
We AFFIRM Smith's convictions.