Jason K. Jones v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 73A01-1702-CR-208

Jason K. Jones and his ex-wife B.J., who continued living together with their children after divorce, argued on July 25, 2015; Jones left, returned with a gun, shot into the garage, and followed B.J. into the house.
Jones grabbed B.J. by the throat, pushed her to the floor, held pressure on her neck (impairing breathing), pulled down her pants/underwear, and inserted two fingers into her vagina while saying she wanted it.
B.J. repeatedly told him to get off; a child entered and yelled; B.J. struck Jones with insect spray, grabbed a knife, called 911, and later reported the incident and played audio recordings for police.
Forensic nurse documented bruises; police recovered Jones’s handgun, a broken fingernail, and a bullet hole; Jones admitted threatening, pushing, and firing the gun.
Jones was convicted after a bench trial of Level 1 rape (threat/use of deadly force), intimidation, criminal confinement (Level 5), criminal recklessness, strangulation, and domestic battery in the presence of a child; sentenced to 20 years.
On appeal Jones challenged (1) sufficiency of evidence for Level 1 rape (challenge to threat/use of deadly force element) and (2) that convictions for rape and criminal confinement violate double jeopardy under the actual-evidence test.

Issue	State's Argument	Jones's Argument	Held
Sufficiency — Was rape elevated to Level 1 by a threat/use of deadly force?	Evidence showed multiple threats to kill, Jones had a gun and fired it, and he physically strangled B.J., creating a substantial risk of serious injury.	The isolated threat to kill was not sufficiently connected to the sexual assault to support Level 1 elevation; at most Level 3 rape.	Affirmed Level 1: threats + gun use + strangulation supported imminent threat of deadly force.
Double jeopardy — Do rape and criminal confinement convictions rest on the same actual evidence?	Evidence showed confinement began before and exceeded the force used during the sexual assault; separate factual bases supported each conviction.	The confinement was coextensive with the force used during the rape (short time on top of victim); convictions duplicate the same conduct.	Affirmed both convictions: no reasonable possibility the court used the same facts for both; confinement extended beyond the rape.

Jackson v. State, 683 N.E.2d 560 (Ind. 1997) (threats to kill implicate submission due to fear; threat integral to attempted rape conviction)
Pennington v. State, 523 N.E.2d 414 (Ind. 1988) (threats to kill plus impaired breathing support finding of threatened deadly force)
Ford v. State, 543 N.E.2d 357 (Ind. 1989) (a threat of deadly force is sufficient when imminent enough to cause victim’s submission)
Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind. 1999) (sets forth statutory-elements and actual-evidence double jeopardy tests)
Wieland v. State, 736 N.E.2d 1198 (Ind. 2000) (explains actual-evidence test application)
Gates v. State, 759 N.E.2d 631 (Ind. 2001) (confinement inherent in rape may still be independently punishable if confinement exceeds force needed to commit rape)
Jacobs v. State, 2 N.E.3d 116 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (concluding confinement was not distinct where force did not exceed that necessary to commit sexual crime)
Purter v. State, 515 N.E.2d 858 (Ind. 1987) (affirmed rape and confinement convictions where confinement extended beyond the rape)