Kemp v. State

647 N.E.2d 1143, 1995 Ind. App. LEXIS 294, 1995 WL 108551
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 16, 1995
Docket48A02-9406-CR-386
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 647 N.E.2d 1143 (Kemp v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kemp v. State, 647 N.E.2d 1143, 1995 Ind. App. LEXIS 294, 1995 WL 108551 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinions

OPINION

FRIEDLANDER, Judge.

Donald Kemp appeals his conviction of Sexual Battery, a class C felony,1 arguing that the trial court erroneously instructed the jury.

We affirm.

The facts favorable to the judgment are that in the early morning hours of December 20, 1992, Kemp went to the home of his ex-wife, D.K. When D.K. answered the door, Kemp pushed his way inside, pulled off D.K.'s clothes and forced D.K. to engage in intercourse and oral sex with him. On April 30, 1998, the State filed an information charging Kemp with rape, a class B felony.2 At trial, after the evidence was presented, the State tendered a jury instruction erroneously stating that sexual battery is a lesser included offense of rape. The parties discussed the instruction. Defense counsel informed the court that he wanted his client to make the decision of whether to include the instruction. The following colloquy took place between Kemp and defense counsel:

"Q. Sir, state your name for the court please?
Donald Dennis Kemp, Jr. |
And we're out of the presence of the jury. Am I correct? $
Yes Sir. p
You've been charged with Rape, a Class B Felony. Am I right? $
Yes Sir. >
The State has added or requested lesser included offenses of Sexual Bat- & tery as a 'C felony and a 'D' felony. Am I correct?
Yes Sir.
I have told you and discussed with you outside the presence of the jury that I found a case which is Scrougham vs. State, (1990) 564 N.E.2d, 542 which provides that ... 'In other words ...' I'm quoting here. 'In other words, sexual battery is not a lesser included offense of rape. I've told you that the cases say that. Am I right?
|p Yes Sir.
© And I told you that I discovered this case only today. Am I correct?
p Yes Sir.
6 So I asked you to do what outside the courtroom?
Go over the form.
And ...
Make a decision.
$ As to what?
> Whether those should be allowed or not.
& What did I tell you the upshot was if you did ... What did I tell you the various alternatives were? If you had to make a decision, you had to decide between what?
A lesser of three (8) evils is what it sounds like to me.
© Exactly in other words?
p Make a decision on whether ... I don't understand what you're saying.
© What decision did you just make?
| To leave them in.
© Leave what in?
p The 'C' and 'D' felony.
© The 'C and 'D' felony. Did I tell you what the 'D' felony could bring in terms of time and jail?
} Yes Sir.
© How much?
p Six (6) months to three (8) years.
© Did I tell you what the 'C' felony could bring you?
[1145]*1145p> Yeah, I think it was three (8) to six (6) years.
It was two (2) to eight (8) years. D
Two (2) to eight (8) years. p
Did I tell you what the 'B' felony could bring? $
Up to twenty (20) years. p>
And did I tell you that the cases say it's not a lesser included offense and therefore I could theoretically object? &
Yes Sir. p
And are you telling me to object or not to object? ©
Not to object. }p
Are you sure? 6
No but that's my decision.
That's your decision. Did, in fact, your wife and you talk about it also?
Yes Sir. >
Okay." $

Record at 767-772. The court instructed the jury as to rape, a class B felony, and then instructed them regarding sexual battery as follows:

"The term 'included offense' is defined by law as meaning an offense that: is established by proof of the same material elements or less than all the material elements required to establish the commission of the offense charged; consists of an attempt to commit the offense charged or an offense otherwise included therein; or differs from the offense charged only in the respect that a less serious harm or risk of harm to the same person, property, or public interest, or a lesser kind of culpability, is required to establish its commission. The lesser included offense of Sexual Battery is: I.C. 385-42-4-8. A person who, with intent to arouse or satisfy the person's own sexual desires or the sexual desires of another person, touches another person when that person is compelled to submit to the touching by force or the imminent threat of force commits sexual battery, a Class D Felony. However, the offense is a Class C Felony if it is committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force.... To convict the defendant, the State must have proved each of the following elements: The defendant knowingly or intentionally, with the intent to arouse or satisfy his own sexual desires or the sexual desires of Denise Kemp touched Denise Kemp when Denise Kemp was compelled to submit to the touching by force or the imminent threat of force.... If you further find beyond a reasonable doubt that the offense was committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant guilty of sexual battery, a Class C Felony."

Record at 880-882. The jury convicted Kemp of sexual battery, a class C felony, and acquitted Kemp on the charge of rape. The trial court sentenced Kemp to four years imprisonment. Kemp appeals and presents the following issue:

Did the trial court err when it tendered jury instructions erroneously stating that sexual battery is a lesser included offense of rape?

Kemp asserts he was deprived of his right to due process because the judge instructed the jury on sexual battery when he was only charged with rape. Both parties agree that sexual battery is not, as a matter of law, a lesser included offense of rape. Kemp, however, ignores the fact that he expressly agreed to the instruction at trial. Kemp invited the error of which he complains.

In Sund v. State (1974), 162 Ind.App. 550, 320 N.E.2d 790, the defendant was charged with first degree arson. The defendant requested and the court allowed a jury instruction stating that fourth degree arson was a lesser included offense of first degree arson. The jury convicted the defendant of fourth degree arson and the defendant appealed, claiming a variance between the crime charged and the crime for which he was convicted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kevin Buckley v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2013
State v. Kelso
654 S.E.2d 28 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2007)
Kiera R. Carter v. State of Indiana
Indiana Supreme Court, 1998
Carter v. State
686 N.E.2d 834 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1997)
Anderson v. State
674 N.E.2d 184 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1996)
Kemp v. State
647 N.E.2d 1143 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
647 N.E.2d 1143, 1995 Ind. App. LEXIS 294, 1995 WL 108551, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kemp-v-state-indctapp-1995.