501 P.3d 1160
Utah Ct. App.2021Background:
- Victim (pseudonym Tiana) accepted what she believed was a cleaning job; Washington instead took her to his home and offered money for sex ($200, then $1,000/month), which she refused.
- After rejection, Washington hugged Tiana, would not let go, gripped her shoulders and sweatshirt, attempted to throw her on a bed, and tried to block her exit; Tiana escaped and reported an attempted rape.
- Police found Tiana’s sweatshirt and phone at Washington’s house. Washington was charged with sexual solicitation and attempted rape and taken into custody.
- Two conflicting competency evaluations were produced; defense counsel stipulated to competency at a review hearing, and Washington waived a jury trial.[1]
- At bench trial the court denied a directed-verdict motion on attempted rape, found Washington guilty of sexual solicitation and attempted rape, and Washington appealed challenging sufficiency (substantial-step) and alleging ineffective assistance for stipulating to competency.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Washington) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency: Did evidence establish the "substantial step" element for attempted rape? | Conduct (grip, attempt to throw on bed, seize sweatshirt, block door) plus statement of intent strongly corroborate intent and constitute substantial steps. | Actions were no more than solicitation and preparation; did not rise to attempt as in Arave where solicitation alone was insufficient. | Affirmed: Court held Washington’s restraint and preventive acts, together with his admission of intent, satisfied the substantial-step test. |
| Ineffective assistance: Was counsel deficient in stipulating to competency given conflicting reports? | Counsel’s stipulation was reasonable; appellant bears burden to show deficient performance and prejudice. | Counsel unreasonably agreed to competency despite conflicting reports, undermining due process. | Affirmed: Appellant failed to supply the competency-hearing transcript or seek a remand, so cannot show counsel’s performance was deficient. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Arave, 268 P.3d 163 (Utah 2011) (explains "substantial step" for attempt and that additional preventive actions distinguish solicitation from attempt)
- State v. Scott, 462 P.3d 350 (Utah 2020) (sets Strickland-type test for ineffective-assistance claims)
- State v. Barner, 464 P.3d 190 (Utah Ct. App. 2020) (standard of review for directed-verdict motions based on sufficiency of the evidence)
- State v. Fowers, 309 P.3d 1156 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (action constituting substantial step must strongly corroborate intent)
- United States v. Washington, 653 F.3d 1251 (10th Cir. 2011) (recognizes substantial-step need not be the last act necessary)
[1] The court acknowledged the existence of two conflicting competency reports but accepted the report relied on at the competency review hearing; the hearing transcript was not included in the appellate record.