People v. Pifer
350 P.3d 936
Colo. Ct. App.2014Background
- Three girls (ages 9–12) returned a dog to defendant Eric Pifer; he invited them into his apartment where they played.
- During play, Pifer chased and tossed a sheet over each girl and touched their intimate areas over clothing and/or the sheet.
- Charges: one count of sexual assault on a child (as to K.J.) and three counts of enticement of a child (one per girl).
- Trial: jury convicted Pifer of sexual assault as to K.J., acquitted on sexual-assault counts for the other two girls, and convicted on all three enticement counts.
- Sentence: seven years to life under the Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act (SOLSA). Pifer appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency — sexual assault (K.J.) | Evidence showed touching of clothing covering intimate area; sufficient sexual contact. | Touching occurred through a sheet between Pifer’s hand and K.J.’s clothing, so it was not touching the clothing covering the immediate area. | Affirmed — touching through a sheet qualifies as "touching" clothing covering intimate area; sufficient evidence. |
| Sufficiency — enticement (three girls) | Asking the girls to come inside was an invitation; circumstantial evidence supported intent to commit sexual assault. | Asking was not persuasion/enticement; no proof he intended sexual assault at the time of invitation. | Affirmed — asking was an invitation and evidence (exposed underwear, timing, subsequent touching) supported intent at the time he invited them in. |
| Challenge for cause (prospective juror) | N/A (court/People opposed challenge) | Juror said he might become impatient/frustrated in deliberations; defense sought cause challenge. | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; juror gave no indication of bias or inability to follow law; peremptory used instead. |
| SOLSA constitutionality | N/A (People defended statute) | SOLSA is facially unconstitutional. | Affirmed — court follows prior divisions rejecting similar constitutional challenges to SOLSA. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Scoggins, 240 P.3d 331 (Colo. App. 2009) (statutory interpretation principles).
- People v. Vinson, 42 P.3d 86 (Colo. App. 2002) (touching clothing including ejaculating onto clothing can constitute sexual contact).
- People v. Voth, 312 P.3d 144 (Colo. 2013) (courts may consult dictionaries to determine plain meaning).
- People v. Baer, 973 P.2d 1225 (Colo. 1999) (statutory words given common meaning).
- Clark v. People, 232 P.3d 1287 (Colo. 2010) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence).
- People v. Lehmkuhl, 117 P.3d 98 (Colo. App. 2004) (upholding SOLSA against multiple constitutional challenges).