State v. Wood, 895 N.W.2d 701

Robyn J. Wood, a Boys Town shift manager, was charged and convicted by a jury of first‑degree sexual assault of a protected individual under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28‑322.04(3) for sexual intercourse with T.Z., a 17‑year‑old resident under state custody.
Evidence included staff testimony about Wood's preferential treatment and boundary issues with T.Z., Wood’s roommate Hutchinson reporting that Wood admitted having sex with T.Z., and a recorded police interview in which Wood described the encounter and admitted attending Sexaholics Anonymous.
Wood’s account (in the interview) said she initially resisted, then ceased fighting and participated; T.Z. testified the intercourse was mutual and Wood did not tell him to stop except when she received a text.
Jury instructions defined “subject” as “to bring under control or dominion,” and the jury found Wood guilty. Wood moved for a new trial arguing insufficiency of the evidence; the district court denied the motion.
On appeal Wood argued (1) the evidence was insufficient because she did not "subject" T.Z. (he was the aggressor), (2) the motion for new trial should have been granted, and (3) the district court erred in overruling a motion in limine to exclude evidence of her Sexaholics Anonymous attendance.

Issue	Wood's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to show Wood "subjected" a protected individual to sexual penetration under § 28‑322.04	Wood: She did not "subject" T.Z.; he effectuated penetration and was the aggressor, so element of control/dominion is lacking	State: "Subject" means to cause to undergo the action specified; Wood caused penetration by participating despite victim's role	Court: Affirmed; "subject" means "to cause to undergo" and Wood’s participation satisfied the statute
Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying a new trial based on alleged insufficiency of evidence	Wood: Verdict not sustained by the evidence; new trial warranted	State: Evidence supported conviction; no substantial right prejudiced	Court: No abuse of discretion; evidence supported conviction
Whether the in limine ruling admitting evidence of Wood's attendance at Sexaholics Anonymous was preserved and erroneous	Wood: Court erred in overruling motion in limine to exclude this evidence	State: No contemporaneous objection at trial when evidence was offered	Court: Issue not preserved for appeal because no objection during trial
Whether erroneous jury instruction defining "subject" as "bring under control or dominion" required reversal	Wood: (implicitly) instruction was incorrect and prejudicial	State: Instruction was narrower than correct definition but did not prejudice verdict	Court: Instructional error harmless; jury still convicted under narrower definition

State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 (Neb. 2015) ("subject" means "to cause to undergo the action of something specified")
State v. Dominguez, 290 Neb. 477 (Neb. 2015) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Kolbjornsen, 295 Neb. 231 (Neb. 2016) (appellate court reaches independent conclusions on questions of law)
State v. Abram, 284 Neb. 55 (Neb. 2012) (harmless error analysis for instructional errors)
State v. McHenry, 250 Neb. 614 (Neb. 1996) (definition and application of harmless error in criminal jury trials)
State v. Almasaudi, 282 Neb. 162 (Neb. 2011) (motion in limine rulings do not preserve evidentiary issues for appeal without trial objection)