State v. O'Hara

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 07-18-2012
  • Case #: A146327
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Brewer, P.J. for the Court; and Haselton, C.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

To satisfy the element of forcible compulsion, the trier of fact may consider circumstances known to the defendant that relate to whether the victim was in fact compelled.

Defendant appealed his jury conviction of first-degree rape and first-degree sexual abuse. In June 2002, when Victim was 14 years old, Defendant talked with Victim and touched her breast. Later, Defendant pushed Victim onto a bed and had sexual intercourse with her while holding her wrists and forearms. Victim cried and told Defendant that she did not want this. Defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal on the charges based on grounds that the State did not sufficiently prove forcible compulsion. The trial court denied the motion. Forcible compulsion is defined by ORS 163.305(2)(a) as a means to compel by physical force. The parties relied on the Supreme Court's decision in State v. Marshall, which examined the physical force aspect of forcible compulsion. Following Marshall, the Court of Appeals held that the totality of circumstances, difference in age and size, Defendant's relationship with Victim's family, and the location in which the crime occurred, demonstrated that the evidence of forcible compulsion was sufficient for a jury determination on the charge of first-degree rape. Affirmed.

Advanced Search