State v. Touchet
2005 WL 545095, 897 So. 2d 900 (2005)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For a conviction of aggravated rape based on the offender being armed with a dangerous weapon, the evidence must show the weapon was used or accessible in a manner that actually prevented the victim from resisting the act, not merely that a weapon was present at the scene.
Facts:
- Wilbert Touchet, Jr. and the victim met around Mardi Gras 2002 and began a romantic relationship, moving in together shortly thereafter.
- Approximately two weeks after moving in, Touchet and the victim returned home from an outing, and Touchet accused her of acting like a "whore."
- Inside their home, Touchet told the victim, "[i]f you want to act like a whore, I'm going to treat you like a whore," and ordered her to remove her clothes.
- When the victim initially refused, Touchet pulled out a pocket knife, causing her to fear he was capable of using it.
- The victim, believing she was the "underdog," then removed her clothing as instructed.
- After she undressed, Touchet set the knife down, approached her, and had sexual intercourse with her against her will.
- In a separate incident prior to the sexual assault, Touchet struck the victim with his fists, causing bruises.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Louisiana charged Wilbert Touchet, Jr. with aggravated rape, second degree battery, and false imprisonment in a state trial court.
- Touchet entered pleas of not guilty to all charges.
- Touchet waived his right to a trial by jury.
- Following a bench trial, the trial judge found Touchet guilty on all three counts.
- The trial court sentenced Touchet to life imprisonment for aggravated rape and concurrent five-year sentences for the other two charges.
- Touchet, as Defendant-Appellant, appealed his convictions to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the evidence presented by the state, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, sufficiently support the defendant's convictions for aggravated rape, second degree battery, and false imprisonment?
Opinions:
Majority - Decuir, J.
No, the evidence presented by the state is insufficient to support the convictions for aggravated rape, second degree battery, and false imprisonment, but is sufficient to support convictions for the lesser included offenses of sexual battery and simple battery. For the aggravated rape charge, the state failed to prove that the victim was prevented from resisting because the offender was armed. Unlike precedent where a weapon remained accessible, Touchet set the knife down before the sexual act, and the victim did not testify it was near him during the intercourse. The evidence was also insufficient for the lesser offense of forcible rape because there was minimal resistance and no showing of force or threats sufficient to prevent resistance. However, the elements of sexual battery were met because the victim did not consent to the sexual touching. For the second degree battery charge, the state failed to prove the element of "serious bodily injury," as the victim's bruises did not constitute extreme physical pain or protracted disfigurement as defined by the statute; however, the evidence did support a conviction for simple battery. Finally, the conviction for false imprisonment is reversed because the state presented no evidence that the victim attempted to leave and was prevented from doing so by Touchet.
Dissenting in part - Pickett, J.
No, as to the second degree battery and false imprisonment convictions, but Yes, as to the aggravated rape conviction. I agree with the majority's conclusion regarding the convictions for second degree battery and false imprisonment. However, I respectfully dissent from vacating the aggravated rape conviction, as I believe the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to uphold the trial court's guilty verdict on that charge.
Analysis:
This decision refines the evidentiary requirements for Louisiana's tiered sexual assault and battery statutes, clarifying the distinction between offenses based on the degree of force and weapon use. It establishes that for an aggravated rape conviction under the armed-with-a-weapon provision, the weapon must be a causal factor in preventing the victim's resistance during the act, not merely present beforehand. This ruling provides clearer guidance for lower courts and prosecutors in assessing the sufficiency of evidence, potentially leading to more precise charging decisions based on the specific facts of how a weapon was employed in a sexual assault.
