State v. Wood, 296 Neb. 738

Robyn J. Wood, a shift manager at Boys Town (a state-contracted residential treatment center), was charged with first-degree sexual assault of a protected individual under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-322.04(3) for a June 2014 sexual encounter with T.Z., a 17-year-old resident in state custody.
T.Z. and other staff testified that Wood and T.Z. had a history of flirtatious, boundary-crossing behavior; other staff advised Wood not to be alone with T.Z. but the conduct continued.
Wood told a roommate she had had sex with T.Z.; the roommate reported it to Child Protective Services. Wood’s recorded interview with Boys Town police (played at trial) described initial resistance, then stopping resistance after feeling she could be "a statistic or a willing participant," and stated she attends Sexaholics Anonymous.
T.Z.’s trial testimony described mutual kissing and an account of the sexual intercourse in which he said Wood did not tell him to stop, though she later asked him to stop when she received a text.
The jury was instructed that the State must prove Wood “subjected [T.Z.] to sexual penetration,” and that “subject” meant “to bring under control or dominion.” Wood was convicted; her motion for new trial was denied and she appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence that defendant "subjected" protected individual to sexual penetration	State: Evidence (T.Z., roommate, and Wood's interview) shows Wood caused/participated in the sexual act so she subjected T.Z. to penetration	Wood: She did not exert control/dominion; T.Z. was the aggressor who effectuated penetration, so she did not "subject" him	Court held "subject" means "to cause to undergo the action of something specified;" evidence was sufficient to convict because Wood participated and caused T.Z. to undergo penetration
Jury instruction definition of "subject"	State: instruction was proper or harmless	Wood: instruction wrongly defined "subject" as "bring under control or dominion" (narrower than prior controlling definition)	Instruction was error but harmless because jury convicting under narrower definition shows no prejudice
Motion for new trial (verdict not sustained by evidence)	State: evidence supports verdict	Wood: same sufficiency arguments require new trial	Court found no abuse of discretion in denying new trial; no substantial right violated
Admission of Wood's Sexaholics Anonymous evidence (motion in limine)	State: evidence admissible / used in interview	Wood: such evidence should have been excluded by motion in limine	Issue not preserved on appeal (no contemporaneous objection at trial), so not considered

State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 (definition of "subject" as "to cause to undergo the action of something specified")
State v. Dominguez, 290 Neb. 477 (standard for sufficiency review — view evidence in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Stricklin, 290 Neb. 542 (standard of review for denial of motion for new trial)
State v. Sandoval, 280 Neb. 309 (presumption that jury follows instructions)
State v. Almasaudi, 282 Neb. 162 (motion in limine rulings not preserved absent contemporaneous objection)