State v. Mesa

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed Carlos Mesa's convictions for second-degree rape and second-degree burglary. The court held that the trial court's response to a jury question did not constructively amend the indictment and that sufficient evidence supported the rape conviction.

Holdings

1. Mesa waived the constructive-amendment and jury-instruction challenge by failing to object in the trial court. In any event, the response did not constructively amend the indictment because the jury was not instructed on subsection (4), subsection (3) broadly covered physical or mental incapacity without regard to cause, and the response correctly left the factual determination to the jury.
2. The evidence was sufficient to support Mesa's conviction for second degree rape under SDCL 22-22-1(3), and the court would not speculate about the particular factual basis the jury used for its verdict or reweigh witness credibility.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court's response to the jury's question about whether alcohol impairment could constitute mental incapacity constructively amended the indictment.
2. Whether sufficient evidence supported Mesa's conviction for second degree rape under SDCL 22-22-1(3).

Disposition

affirmed