 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Durango4/2/2003
rrived at Young's apartment at approximately 6:30 a.m. Later that morning, the police took Briana to the hospital. A blood sample taken at 11:35 a.m. revealed her blood alcohol level to be 0.06 percent. Based on Briana's 0.06 percent blood-alcohol level at the time the sample was taken, a criminalist opined her blood-alcohol level was between 0.18 and 0.24 percent at 5:45 a.m. At that level of intoxication she would feel disoriented and have delayed reaction times. She would also stumble and fall down.
Defendant took the stand in his own defense. He testified that when he sat down on the couch next to Briana she said "Hi" to him and began rubbing his stomach. She did not appear to be intoxicated. She bent over without any prompting and he admitted penetrating her with his penis. She became upset when she realized he ejaculated inside of her.
DISCUSSION
There Was Sufficient Evidence to Establish Rape by Intoxication
Defendant first argues the evidence was insufficient to establish that Briana was intoxicated to such a degree she lacked the capacity to consent to sex. "`To determine the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, an appellate court reviews the entire record in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether it contains evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid value, from which a rational trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.' [Citation.]" (People v. Bolden (2002) 29 Cal.4th 515, 553.)
Under Penal Code section 261, subdivision (a)(3), a rape is committed when a defendant engages in an act of sexual intercourse where the victim "is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating . . . substance, . . . and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused." The intoxication level must be such that "the victim is incapable of exercising the judgment required to decide whether to consent to intercourse." (People v. Giardino (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 454, 464.)
Here, there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding of guilt. Prior to Briana's attack, she vomited twice in defendant's presence. There was also substantial evidence that Briana was unconscious when defendant began having sex with her. Young testified Briana passed out on the couch and, "she laid down and didn't move from that point on." Briana testified she woke up when she felt her head banging against the couch, and initially thought she was dreaming someone was having intercourse with her. Maggie described the whimpering noises coming from Briana, as not being noises of pleasure, but as noises made by someone who was just "waking up and realizing what was going on." While the jury was unable to agree beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was guilty of raping Briana while she was unconscious, this evidence of Briana's state of consciousness (or lack thereof) was strong evidence both of severe impairment caused by alcohol and of defendant's knowledge of Briana's impairment.
Significantly, defendant also admitted he knew of Briana's intoxication. He testified that when he went to get a towel to clean off his ejaculate from her body, he told her not to get up because "she was too drunk on the couch." He also admitted in a subsequent telephone conversation with Briana "I took advantage of you because you were drunk[.]" Expert testimony also established that at the time of her attack, her blood alcohol level was between 0.18 percent and 0.24 percent, and at that blood alcohol level a person would feel disoriented, particularly if they had just been awakened, and would also have delayed physical reactions. The evidence here was sufficient to support defend
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|