State v. Thompson

Summary

The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Rowdy Lee Thompson’s motion to clarify his sentence and obtain removal from the sex offender registry. The court held that the district court properly considered the victim’s statement and the entire record in determining that it could not find the offense involved no force or coercion. The court also held that any prosecutorial misstatement regarding force or coercion did not prejudice Thompson’s plain-error or ineffective-assistance claims.

Holdings

1. Because the plea agreement and Thompson's agreed factual account were silent regarding force or coercion, the district court properly considered the entire record, including the victim's written statement, in determining whether Thompson's offense involved force or coercion.
2. The prosecutor's statement that force did not appear in the elements or aggravating factors of the relevant child-sex offenses was legally incorrect, but it did not constitute reversible plain error because Thompson failed to show prejudice.
3. Thompson's ineffective-assistance claim failed because he did not establish prejudice from counsel's failure to object.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court properly considered the victim's written statement and the other materials in the record when determining whether Thompson's offense involved force or coercion.
2. Whether the prosecutor's allegedly incorrect statement concerning force as an element or aggravating factor of child-sex offenses required reversal under plain-error review.
3. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor's alleged misstatement of the law.

Disposition

affirmed