United States v. James
810 F. 3d 674 (2016)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The term "physically incapable" under 18 U.S.C. § 2242(2)(B) establishes a broad standard for criminal liability that does not require a victim to be completely "physically helpless." It encompasses situations where a victim's physical disabilities are sufficiently severe to prevent them from either declining participation in or effectively communicating unwillingness to engage in a sexual act.
Facts:
- T.C., a twenty-eight-year-old woman, is severely disabled by cerebral palsy, rendering her non-ambulatory, without the use of her hands, and requiring assistance for all major daily activities.
- T.C. is largely non-verbal and communicates primarily through nodding, grunting, and moaning; her caretaker testified her responses are often nonsensical.
- She can express anger by growling or giving a "mean look," and once bit a person she did not like.
- Christopher James, T.C.'s uncle by adoption, was discovered having sex with T.C. on her grandparents' porch.
- James admitted to investigators that he removed T.C. from her wheelchair, undressed her, and penetrated her with his digit and penis.
- James described T.C. during the assault as "just laying there" and wrote a statement saying she was "incent [sic] of all things."
- A medical examination revealed that T.C. had torn tissue and a bleeding laceration in her vaginal area.
Procedural Posture:
- A federal grand jury indicted Christopher James on two counts of sexual abuse in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2242(2)(B).
- The case was tried in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
- James moved for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the government's case and again after trial, on which the court reserved its ruling.
- The jury returned a guilty verdict on both counts.
- Following the verdict, the district court judge granted James's motion for a judgment of acquittal, finding the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction.
- The United States Government (appellant) appealed the district court's judgment of acquittal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, with Christopher James as the appellee.
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 sufficient evidence support a jury's finding that a victim with severe cerebral palsy was "physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in" a sexual act under 18 U.S.C. § 2242(2)(B), when the victim had some limited, non-verbal means of communication?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Tallman
Yes. Sufficient evidence supports the jury's verdict because the term "physically incapable" under 18 U.S.C. § 2242(2)(B) is a broad standard that is distinct from and less stringent than the "physically helpless" standard used in some state laws. The court reasoned that the district court erred by conflating the two standards and applying an overly narrow interpretation. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, a rational juror could conclude that T.C.'s severe physical limitations—her inability to use her arms, walk, or reliably communicate—rendered her physically incapable of either declining participation or communicating unwillingness. James's own admission that she was passive and "just laying there" further supported the jury's finding that he violated the statute.
Dissenting - Judge Kozinski
No. The evidence was insufficient for a rational trier of fact to find that T.C. was physically incapable of communicating unwillingness. The statute's plain language requires the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim could not, by word or deed, indicate non-assent. The dissent argued that the prosecution's own witnesses testified that T.C. could communicate disagreement by shaking her head, growling, and giving mean looks. The majority's reliance on T.C.'s inability to physically fight back is irrelevant to her capacity to communicate, and its interpretive approach of favoring jury submissions over statutory clarity improperly expands criminal liability.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the scope of "physically incapable" under federal sexual abuse law, establishing it as a broad, fact-specific standard for the jury. By distinguishing it from the stricter "physically helpless" standard, the ruling makes it easier for prosecutors to secure convictions in cases involving victims with severe disabilities who are not unconscious but whose ability to resist or communicate is profoundly compromised. The case sets a key precedent within the Ninth Circuit, giving more deference to jury verdicts on the issue of a victim's physical capacity and potentially influencing how similar federal statutes are interpreted nationwide.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. James