State Of Washington v. Domingo Montar-morales, 73452-1

Background

Around 1:00 a.m. officers responded to reports of a street fight and a possible sexual assault after neighbors confronted and restrained Domingo Montar‑Morales following an apparent intrusion and thefts at nearby apartments.
A 12‑year‑old victim (Y.J.) testified she was touched on the left buttock and that the touching went “inside” halfway to the knuckle; she later gave some inconsistent statements about penetration.
Montar‑Morales was handcuffed at the scene for noncompliance and safety; paramedics recommended hospital treatment for a head laceration and officers transported him, still handcuffed, over his objection.
At the hospital Montar‑Morales was Mirandized and released to officers after the hospital cleared him; property belonging to the burglary victims was recovered from him when booked.
He was charged with child rape (2d degree), child molestation, residential burglary, and multiple theft counts; convicted by a jury on most counts; child molestation vacated by the trial court on double jeopardy grounds.

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Montar‑Morales's Argument	Held
Whether transporting detainee to hospital exceeded Terry investigative‑stop scope	Transport was reasonable and safety/medical need justified short movement during valid detention	Moving him to hospital and treating him while handcuffed exceeded Terry and amounted to an arrest without probable cause	Transport and treatment during detention were reasonable under totality of circumstances; no suppression error
Whether handcuffing elevated detention to arrest	Handcuffs justified by noncompliance, reports of assault, and officer safety	Handcuffs (and duration) made the detention an arrest requiring probable cause	Use of handcuffs did not convert stop to arrest given circumstances
Sufficiency of evidence for rape (penetration)	Victim’s testimony that touching went “inside” and diagram supported inference of anal penetration	Testimony and diagram were ambiguous and inconsistent; State failed to prove penetration beyond reasonable doubt	Jury could reasonably infer penetration; evidence sufficient to support conviction
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying severance of sex and property charges	Charges were factually intertwined (time, place, possible sexual motive); limiting instruction and res gestae finding mitigated prejudice	Joinder prejudiced fair trial by allowing jury to infer criminal disposition and cumulate evidence	Denial of severance not a manifest abuse of discretion; limiting instruction and cross‑admissibility justified joinder

Key Cases Cited

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes standard for brief investigatory detentions)
State v. Houser, 95 Wn.2d 143 (warrantless searches/seizures presumptively unreasonable)
State v. Williams, 102 Wn.2d 733 (investigatory stop limits and least intrusive means)
State v. Wheeler, 108 Wn.2d 230 (moving detainee short distance for identification can remain investigatory)
State v. Bray, 143 Wn. App. 148 (reasonableness of detention duration analyzed by circumstances)
State v. A.M., 163 Wn. App. 414 (distinguishing buttock contact from anal penetration for rape)
State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192 (sufficiency review: accept State’s evidence and reasonable inferences)
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (State must prove every element beyond reasonable doubt)
State v. Lane, 125 Wn.2d 825 (res gestae and limits on ER 404(b) evidence)
State v. Bourgeois, 133 Wn.2d 389 (presumption that jury follows limiting instructions)