Perez v. StatePerez v. State
Some evidence was presented to the jury that the victim did communicate her unwillingness to participate in any act. However, the victim testified that Perez hit her in the face breaking her nose and causing much bleeding to occur before committing sexual battery upon her person. Therefore, there was evidence from which the jury could find that the severe blow to her face rendered the victim physically unable to effectively communicate her unwillingness to the act.
Whether a victim was “physically unable to communicate his unwillingness”2 and thus was “physically helpless to resist”3 are factual questions for the jury. McIlwain v. State, 402 So.2d 1194 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So.2d 467 (Fla. 1982).
The jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that, at the time of her sexual battery, the victim was “physically helpless to resist.” There was substantial competent evidence to support that conclusion. We do not have the authority to re-weigh or re-evaluate the evidence. Tibbs v. State, 397 So.2d 1120 (Fla. 1981), aff‘d, Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982).
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.