State v. Knapp

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that jury instructions in Leland Knapp’s second-degree rape trial adequately conveyed that the State bore the burden of proving forcible compulsion, including the absence of consent as part of that element. The court concluded that consent and forcible compulsion are mutually exclusive and that the instructions, read as a whole, were not misleading and permitted Knapp to argue his consent defense. The court affirmed Knapp’s conviction and the Court of Appeals.

Holdings

1. The jury instructions were constitutionally adequate because, taken as a whole, they placed on the State the burden of proving every element of second degree rape, including forcible compulsion, and permitted the jury to consider evidence of consent in determining whether forcible compulsion existed. A separate express instruction that the State must prove lack of consent beyond a reasonable doubt was not required.
2. Lack of consent is not a separate and distinct element of second degree rape by forcible compulsion; it is encompassed within the State's burden to prove forcible compulsion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court's jury instructions adequately conveyed that the State bears the burden of proving lack of consent as part of its proof of forcible compulsion in a prosecution for second degree rape.
2. Whether Knapp's proposed instructions improperly treated lack of consent as a separate element of second degree rape by forcible compulsion.
3. Whether the jury instructions, considered as a whole, were constitutionally adequate because they stated the elements and the State's burden of proof, were not misleading, and permitted Knapp to present his consent theory.

Disposition

affirmed