State v. Miller

635 P.2d 160, 30 Wash. App. 443, 1981 Wash. App. LEXIS 2774
Court of Appeals of Washington·Decided October 13, 1981·No. 3743-6-III·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Green, J.

— Jerry A. Miller appeals his conviction of the crime of indecent liberties. The question presented is whether the crime of indecent liberties is a lesser included offense of statutory rape.

The only facts relevant to this appeal are: On November 3, 1978, Mr. Miller was charged by information with statutory rape in the second degree pursuant to former RCW 9.79.210. The jury was instructed the crime charged necessarily includes the crime of indecent liberties. Mr. Miller was found not guilty of statutory rape, but guilty of indecent liberties.

Mr. Miller contends indecent liberties is not a lesser included offense of statutory rape, but is a distinct crime. He argues he cannot therefore be convicted of indecent libérties because it was not charged. We disagree.

The Washington State Constitution, article 1, section 22 (amendment 10) and the sixth amendment to the *445 United States Constitution both confer upon a defendant the right to be informed of the nature and cause of an accusation against him. Based upon these provisions, a general rule has developed that a person can be convicted only of those crimes charged in the information; however, an exception exists where a defendant may be found guilty of a lesser included offense of the one charged in the information. State v. Foster, 91 Wn.2d 466, 471, 589 P.2d 789 (1979); RCW 10.61.006. 1 The prosecution may rely upon the exception only when all the elements of the included offense are necessary elements of the offense charged. State v. Workman, 90 Wn.2d 443, 447, 584 P.2d 382 (1978); State v. O’Neal, 23 Wn. App. 899, 600 P.2d 570 (1979); State v. Bowen, 12 Wn. App. 604, 531 P.2d 837 (1975); State v. East, 3 Wn. App. 128, 474 P.2d 582 (1970).

The elements of RCW 9.79.210, 2 the statutory rape statute under which Mr. Miller was charged, require the perpetrator to be: (1) over 16 years of age; and (2) engage in sexual intercourse as defined by RCW 9.79.140; 3 the victim must (3) not be married to the perpetrator; and (4) be 11 *446 but less than 14 years of age. Comparing the elements of this statute with the elements of the indecent liberties statute, RCW 9A.88.100, 4 insofar as applicable to this case, we find (1) the perpetrator must knowingly cause another to have sexual contact with him; and the victim must (2) not be married to the perpetrator; and (3) be less than 14 years of age. Here, Mr. Miller was over 16 years of age and not married to the victim, who was over 11 and less than 14 years of age. Although sexual contact as defined by the indecent liberties statute does not necessarily require penetration, sexual intercourse as defined in RCW 9.79.140 necessarily requires the touching of sexual or other intimate parts of a person as defined under the indecent liberties statute. All elements of indecent liberties in this case are necessary elements of statutory rape. 5 Therefore, the crime of indecent liberties is a lesser included offense of statutory rape in the second degree and Mr. Miller's contention must be rejected.

In view of our holding, we need not reach the other contentions raised by Mr. Miller.

*447 Affirmed.

Roe, A.C.J., and Munson, J., concur.

Reconsideration denied November 10, 1981.

Review denied by Supreme Court January 8,1982.

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

State v. Miller, 635 P.2d 160, 30 Wash. App. 443, 1981 Wash. App. LEXIS 2774 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981).

635 P.2d 160 (State v. Miller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Irizarry
763 P.2d 432 (Washington Supreme Court, 1988)
State v. Abbott
726 P.2d 988 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1986)
State v. Partosa
703 P.2d 1070 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1985)
State v. Jollo
685 P.2d 669 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1984)
State v. Putnam
639 P.2d 858 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1982)
State v. Johnson
639 P.2d 1332 (Washington Supreme Court, 1982)