Craft v. State
291 P.3d 306
Wyo.2012Background
- Craft was convicted by a jury of sexually exploiting a child by causing EW to engage in or be used for the making of child pornography.
- EW, born in 1995, and Craft initially connected online in 2008; they reconnected in 2010 via Facebook and then text messages.
- Over a one-week February 2010 period, their text exchanges became increasingly sexual, including requests for nude images.
- EW sent multiple pictures, including nude images, culminating in a picture showing the top of her vagina; Craft asked for further images.
- Alltel produced a verbatim record of EW’s text messages (State’s Exhibit No. 8) but could not provide the picture messages themselves.
- At trial, Craft moved for judgment of acquittal after the State’s case-in-chief; the district court denied the motion and the jury convicted; Craft was later sentenced to 6–8 years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Insufficiency of evidence to prove lascivious exhibition | Craft argues the picture did not lasciously exhibit EW's genitals. | Craft contends the State failed to prove the element beyond a reasonable doubt. | Denial of the motion for acquittal affirmed; sufficient evidence. |
| Prosecutorial misconduct regarding Exhibit 8 closing argument | Craft claims the prosecutor used Exhibit 8 to prove truth of statements. | State argues exhibit used for non-hearsay purposes showing sexual conduct and its effects. | No plain error; arguments proper in context; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Montes v. State, 201 P.3d 434 (Wy. 2009) (standard for denial of motions for judgment of acquittal)
- Taylor v. State, 246 P.3d 596 (Wyo. 2011) (text about judgment of acquittal standards)
- Martinez v. State, 199 P.3d 526 (Wyo. 2009) (evidence sufficiency framework)
- Guerra v. State, 897 P.2d 447 (Wyo. 1995) (use of out-of-court statements to show effect on hearer)
- Kenyon v. State, 986 P.2d 849 (Wyo. 1999) (hearsay and use of statements to show knowledge/motive)
- Proffit v. State, 191 P.3d 974 (Wyo. 2008) (plain-error framework and prejudice analysis)
- Trujillo v. State, 44 P.3d 22 (Wy. 2002) (plain-error standard for prosecutorial misconduct arguments)
- United States v. Dost, 636 F. Supp. 828 (S.D. Cal. 1986) (Dost factors discussed for lascivious photo analysis)