In re K.C., 226 N.C. App. 452

Juvenile Keith faced petitions for simple assault and sexual battery in Mecklenburg County District Court, hearing held July 19, 2012.
Karen, a 15-year-old classmate, testified Keith touched and grabbed her buttocks during a February 29, 2012 incident; Keith admitted touching but claimed it was accidental.
Officer Gallman investigated, and Karen appeared upset after reporting the incident; Keith largely corroborated Karen’s account up to contact.
Keith moved to dismiss sexual battery; the district court denied it; Keith was adjudicated delinquent for sexual battery and simple assault and placed on probation with sex-offender evaluation.
Keith appeals contending insufficiency of evidence, lack of findings of fact, and ineffective assistance of counsel; the court vacates sexual battery adjudication, affirms simple assault, and remands for disposition findings; IAC is addressed but not decided on the merits.
The court vacates the sexual battery adjudication, affirms the simple assault adjudication, remands for disposition findings, and dismisses IAC issues as moot or premature.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is sexual battery shown by sufficient evidence?	Keith argues evidence is insufficient.	Keith contends the state failed to prove sexual purpose and contact.	Sexual battery adjudication vacated for insufficiency.
Is simple assault supported by sufficient evidence?	State asserts touch without consent constitutes assault.	Keith concedes touching occurred but disputes intent.	Simple assault adjudication affirmed.
Are the adjudication findings of fact adequate?	Keith argues insufficient factual findings for 7B-2411.	Court properly stated findings for simple assault.	Findings adequate for simple assault adjudication; sexual battery vacated.
Did the disposition order satisfy 7B-2501 and require more specific findings?	Keith claims missing factors 3–5 and risk/needs assessment.	Disposition relied on vague report; factors not shown.	Remand for additional disposition findings under 7B-2501.
Is the IAC claim properly addressed?	Keith alleges ineffective assistance of counsel.	IAC is premature or moot as to vacated/affirmed issues.	IAC denied without prejudice as to remaining issues.

State v. Booher, 305 N.C. 554 (N.C. 1982) (Court may reverse for manifest injustice when evidence is clearly insufficient)
In re S.M.S., 196 N.C. App. 170 (N.C. App. 2009) (de novo standard; review of sufficiency in juvenile context)
In re Heil, 145 N.C. App. 24 (N.C. App. 2001) (substantial evidence required for delinquency adjudication)
In re J.V.J., 209 N.C. App. 737 (N.C. App. 2011) (7B-2411 findings and sufficiency of adjudication evaluation)
State v. West, 146 N.C. App. 741 (N.C. App. 2001) (battery may support assault; lack of consent dispositive)