State v. Jackson
2011 UT App 318
| Utah Ct. App. | 2011Background
- In June 2003, Jackson, 43, lived with his parents when Stepdaughter, his former wife’s 17-year-old daughter, resided there and alleged ongoing drug use with him since she was 15.
- Stepdaughter testified that Jackson began having intercourse with her in June 2003 after an episode of sleeping and “dreams” about sex; she yelled at him to leave.
- In February 2005 Stepdaughter told the police about the incident, but she initially denied sexual intercourse; authorities took no further action at that time.
- In February 2008, Stepdaughter reported the June 2003 incident to the police after Jackson helped with her ill baby, prompting the State to file charges on March 27, 2008, charging rape and later adding Unlawful Sexual Conduct.
- The jury trial in May 2009 resulted in an acquittal on rape but a conviction for Unlawful Sexual Conduct; the defense moved to arrest judgment based on the statute of limitations.
- The trial court denied arresting judgment; Jackson appeals arguing Unlawful Sexual Conduct is not a lesser included offense of rape and that the longer rape statute could not extend the limitations period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Unlawful Sexual Conduct a lesser included offense of rape? | Jackson argues Unlawful Sexual Conduct is not included within rape elements. | State contends the two crimes are related as lesser included offenses under certain theories. | Unlawful Sexual Conduct is not a lesser included offense of rape. |
| Can the statute of limitations defense be forfeited for not raising it at trial? | Jackson argues the limitations defense cannot be forfeited and may be raised on appeal. | State argues the defense can be forfeited if not timely raised; precedent allows waiver. | Jackson forfeited the statute-of-limitations defense by not raising it before/during trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hill, 674 P.2d 96 (Utah 1983) (elements-based lesser-included offense test)
- State v. Brooks, 908 P.2d 856 (Utah 1995) (variations in elements may affect lesser-included status)
- State v. Ross, 951 P.2d 236 (Utah Ct.App. 1997) (two-step analysis for lesser-included offenses)
- State v. Rohletter, 160 P.2d 963 (Utah 1945) (age element can prevent lesser-included finding)
- State v. Chukes, 71 P.3d 624 (Utah Ct.App. 2003) (variations in elements may affect inclusion analysis)
- State v. Martinez, 14 P.3d 114 (Utah App. 2000) (footnote dicta on lesser included status not binding)
- James v. Galetka, 965 P.2d 567 (Utah Ct.App. 1998) (statutes of limitations are waivable defenses; not jurisdictional)