State of Washington v. Jonathan R. Terry, 34333-2

Jonathan Terry (juvenile) was charged with second- and third-degree rape for performing oral sex on J.M., a 16-year-old, at an unsupervised party where heavy drinking occurred.
N.R., an eyewitness, testified J.M. repeatedly told Terry not to touch her and that she didn’t want sex; later N.R. saw Terry performing oral sex on J.M.
J.M. had little memory of the incident due to intoxication; she was surprised when told about it the next day.
Terry testified both were highly intoxicated but claimed J.M. invited and encouraged the sexual act.
The juvenile court acquitted Terry of second-degree rape (incapacity/helplessness theory) but found him guilty of third-degree rape (lack of consent clearly expressed) and entered findings supporting that J.M. had repeatedly told Terry not to touch her.
Terry appealed on sufficiency-of-the-evidence grounds; the majority affirmed the bench verdict, and one judge dissented, arguing the evidence showed consent during the contact.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to support conviction for third-degree rape (lack of consent clearly expressed)	State: N.R.’s testimony that J.M. repeatedly told Terry not to touch her and did not want sex supports finding J.M. did not consent and clearly expressed that lack of consent	Terry: testimony and conduct during the act (pulling him closer, moaning, encouraging words/body movements) show J.M. consented or at least created ambiguity	Majority: Evidence sufficient — court may credit N.R. and conclude J.M. had clearly expressed lack of consent; conviction affirmed. Dissent: Evidence was constitutionally insufficient because uncontroverted trial evidence showed consent during the contact.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (due process sufficiency standard — whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Homan, 181 Wn.2d 102 (bench-trial sufficiency standard: review whether substantial evidence supports findings)
State v. Green, 94 Wn.2d 216 (adoption of Jackson sufficiency test in Washington)
State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192 (appellant admits truth of State’s evidence and reasonable inferences on insufficiency review)
State v. Camarillo, 115 Wn.2d 60 (deference to factfinder on credibility and conflicting evidence)
State v. Mares, 190 Wn. App. 343 (prior-expressed refusal can support third-degree rape even if refusal isn’t contemporaneous with intercourse)