State of Washington v. Serafin Moran-Santiago

CourtCourt of Appeals of Washington
DecidedSeptember 28, 2023
Docket39102-7
StatusUnpublished

This text of State of Washington v. Serafin Moran-Santiago (State of Washington v. Serafin Moran-Santiago) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State of Washington v. Serafin Moran-Santiago, (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

FILED SEPTEMBER 28, 2023 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division III

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION THREE

STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) No. 39102-7-III ) Respondent, ) ) v. ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION ) SERAFIN MORAN-SANTIAGO, ) ) Appellant. )

LAWRENCE-BERREY, A.C.J. — Serafin Moran-Santiago appeals his conviction for

rape of a child in the third degree. He argues the evidence is insufficient to sustain his

conviction because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he and the

victim were not married. He also challenges a condition of community custody as

unconstitutionally vague.

We conclude the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction,

accept the State’s concession related to the community custody condition, and remand for

the trial court to modify “romantic/sexual relationships” to “dating/sexual relationships.” No. 39102-7-III State v. Moran-Santiago

FACTS

On the night of April 28, 2021, 15-year-old A.G.1 was home in Spokane drinking

alcohol with a friend while her parents were at work. A.G.’s brother also was home.

That night, Serafin Moran-Santiago, a friend of A.G.’s father and the fiancé of A.G.’s

aunt, arrived at the home.

Mr. Moran-Santiago lived in Florida but flew to Spokane to recover from surgery

on his ruptured appendix. He called both his fiancée and A.G.’s father for a ride from the

airport, but neither was available because both were working.

Mr. Moran-Santiago decided to rent a car to drive to A.G.’s father’s house. When

he arrived, he saw A.G. and her friend on the ground screaming. He called A.G.’s father

to tell him about the girls and asked that he come home. Instead, A.G.’s father called

A.G.’s mother, who left work to check on the girls. Mr. Moran-Santiago waited outside

for A.G.’s mother to arrive.

When A.G.’s mother arrived, A.G.’s friend no longer was at the house. A.G.’s

1 To protect the privacy interests of the minor child, we use her initials throughout this opinion. Gen. Order for Court of Appeals, In re Changes to Case Title (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2018) (effective September 1, 2018), http://www.courts.wa.gov/ appellate_trial_courts.

2 No. 39102-7-III State v. Moran-Santiago

mother was upset by her daughter’s intoxicated condition. But she had to return to work,

so she asked Mr. Moran-Santiago and A.G.’s brother to watch A.G.

Mr. Moran-Santiago and A.G.’s brother joined A.G. on the back porch, where she

was listening to music. Later that evening, Mr. Moran-Santiago twice asked A.G.’s

brother to leave the patio. A.G.’s brother complied with the second request and went

inside to his room downstairs to play video games.

Once Mr. Moran-Santiago was alone with A.G., he put her hand on his penis.

Mr. Moran-Santiago next told A.G. to stand up. He directed her to a table, stood behind

her, removed her shorts, and had sexual intercourse with her. Afterward, A.G. and Mr.

Moran-Santiago went inside the house and sat on the couch until A.G.’s mother returned

home. A.G. went to bed without telling her mother what happened.

When A.G. awoke the next day, she thought the rape was just a dream. But when

she went to the bathroom, she noticed the smell of semen in her underwear.

A.G. called her friend and told her that her “uncle” raped her. Rep. of Proc.

(RP) at 68. A.G.’s mother learned about the rape through the mother of A.G.’s friend and

took A.G. to a local hospital emergency room. Once there, a nurse performed a sexual

assault examination on A.G.

3 No. 39102-7-III State v. Moran-Santiago

An analyst with the Washington State Patrol Crime Laboratory compared oral,

vaginal, perineal, and right and left thigh skin swabs collected from A.G. with a DNA2

sample taken from Mr. Moran-Santiago. The analyst found the presence of spermatozoa

on the vaginal swab that matched Mr. Moran-Santiago’s DNA profile.

Procedure

The State charged Mr. Moran-Santiago with rape of a child in the third degree.

During trial, the State’s witnesses testified consistent with the facts above.

Mr. Moran-Santiago testified in his defense. He testified multiple times that he

was the boyfriend of A.G.’s aunt. He denied that anything sexual occurred between A.G.

and him. When testifying why he was nervous around her, he explained, “[The light from

inside the house shining through the windows to the patio] matters to me because even if

I’m the aunt’s boyfriend, I don’t have a right to be in a dark place with a child.” RP at

183.

The trial court’s to-convict instruction included an element of child rape in the

third degree that required the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that A.G. was not

married to Mr. Moran-Santiago when they had sexual intercourse. The jury found Mr.

Moran-Santiago guilty.

2 Deoxyribonucleic acid.

4 No. 39102-7-III State v. Moran-Santiago

The court sentenced Mr. Moran-Santiago to 13 months of confinement and 36

months of community custody. The court also imposed a condition of community

custody that Mr. Moran-Santiago challenges on appeal:

11) Do not enter into romantic/sexual relationships without the prior approval of your CCO[3]and/or Therapist and not without disclosing your criminal history as verified by your CCO and/or Therapist.

Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 73.

Mr. Moran-Santiago timely appealed.

ANALYSIS

SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

Mr. Moran-Santiago contends the evidence was insufficient to convict him

because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that A.G. and he were not

married. We disagree.

“The sufficiency of the evidence is a question of constitutional law that we review

de novo.” State v. Rich, 184 Wn.2d 897, 903, 365 P.3d 746 (2016). When a defendant

challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the proper inquiry is, “whether, after viewing

the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have

found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192, 201, 829 P.2d

3 Community custody officer.

5 No. 39102-7-III State v. Moran-Santiago

1068 (1992). As noted in the trial court’s instructions to the jury, “[a] reasonable doubt is

one for which a reason exists and may arise from the evidence or lack of evidence. It is

such a doubt as would exist in the mind of a reasonable person after fully, fairly, and

carefully considering all of the evidence or lack of evidence.” CP at 43. Our review is

highly deferential to the jury’s decision. State v. Davis, 182 Wn.2d 222, 227, 340 P.3d

820 (2014).

A claim of insufficiency admits the truth of the State’s evidence and all inferences

that reasonably can be drawn therefrom. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d at 201. All reasonable

inferences from the evidence must be drawn in favor of the State and interpreted most

strongly against the defendant. Id. Circumstantial evidence is not to be considered any

less reliable than direct evidence. State v. Delmarter, 94 Wn.2d 634, 638, 618 P.2d 99

(1980).

Under RCW 9A.44.079(1), a person is guilty of rape of a child in the third

degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is at least 14 years old

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

Related

Marriage of Van Atta v. Van Atta
829 P.2d 3 (Montana Supreme Court, 1992)
State v. Hickman
954 P.2d 900 (Washington Supreme Court, 1998)
State v. Lee
904 P.2d 1143 (Washington Supreme Court, 1995)
State v. Delmarter
618 P.2d 99 (Washington Supreme Court, 1980)
State v. Salinas
829 P.2d 1068 (Washington Supreme Court, 1992)
State of Washington v. Kevin Arther Peters
455 P.3d 141 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2019)
State v. Hickman
135 Wash. 2d 97 (Washington Supreme Court, 1998)
State v. Davis
340 P.3d 820 (Washington Supreme Court, 2014)
State v. Rich
365 P.3d 746 (Washington Supreme Court, 2016)
State v. Arndt
320 P.3d 104 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State of Washington v. Serafin Moran-Santiago, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-washington-v-serafin-moran-santiago-washctapp-2023.