State v. Corey
325 P.3d 250
Wash. Ct. App.2014Background
- A jury found Corey not guilty of indecent liberties with forcible compulsion and not guilty of second degree rape, but guilty of third degree rape.
- AB, 19, and ARB, 17, met Corey at a motel hot tub in Vancouver, where Corey made sexual advances.
- AB stated she was not interested in men and was dating ARB; Corey was 63 and claimed to have had younger girlfriends.
- Corey touched AB in several ways in the hot tub, including rubbing, attempting to touch private areas, and digital penetration; AB stated she did not consent.
- AB left the hot tub after Corey bit her and touched her with his penis; AB reported the incident to motel staff.
- The trial court instructed the jury on third degree rape over defense objection; Corey was convicted of third degree rape.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in instructing on third degree rape | Corey | State | No error; instruction proper |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fernandez-Medina, 141 Wn.2d 448 (Wash. 2000) (three-part test for lesser-degree instructions)
- State v. Peterson, 133 Wn.2d 885 (Wash. 1997) (degree-based offenses and instructions)
- State v. Tamalini, 134 Wn.2d 725 (Wash. 1998) (limits on conviction of lesser offenses)
- State v. Charles, 126 Wn.2d 353 (Wash. 1995) (reversal where no affirmative evidence of unforced intercourse)
- State v. Wright, 152 Wn. App. 64 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009) (requirement of unforced/nonconsensual rape evidence for third degree instruction)
- State v. Ieremia, 78 Wn. App. 746 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995) (third degree rape as inferior to second degree)