Case Title: Boggs v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 18S-CR-430

State: indiana

Court: Indiana Supreme Court

Date: 2018-08-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
I N  T H E  
Indiana Supreme Court 
Supreme Court Case No. 18S-CR-430 
Curtis Boggs, 
Appellant (Defendant below), 
–v– 
State of Indiana, 
Appellee (Plaintiff below). 
Decided: August 23, 2018 
Appeal from the Dearborn Circuit Court, No. 15C01-1603-F1-007 
The Honorable James D. Humphrey 
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals 
No. 15A01-1708-CR-1778 
 
 
 
 
Per Curiam Opinion 
All Justices concur. 
 
FILED
C L E R K
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
Aug 23 2018, 1:45 pm
Indiana Supreme Court |No. 18S-CR-430 | August 23, 2018 
Page 2 of 3 
Per Curiam 
Curtis Boggs was convicted of eight counts of sexual misconduct with a 
minor and four counts of child molestation. On appeal he raised multiple 
issues, including whether the State presented sufficient evidence to 
support his conviction for Level 1 felony child molestation.   
A person commits child molestation by knowingly or intentionally 
performing sexual intercourse or other sexual misconduct with a child 
under fourteen years of age. Ind. Code § 35-42-4-3. The offense is a Level 1 
felony if committed by a person at least twenty-one years of age. Id. 
“’Sexual intercourse’ means an act that includes any penetration of the 
female sex organ by the male sex organ.” I.C. § 35-31.5-2-302. “’Other 
sexual misconduct’ includes “an act involving … the penetration of the 
sex organ or anus of a person by an object.” I.C. § 35-31.5-2-221.5. 
  Boggs was found guilty of child molestation for engaging in other 
sexual misconduct. S.H. testified that Boggs put his finger “in the folds of 
her vagina” and touched her clitoris. (Tr. Vol. II p. 221.) Boggs appealed 
on grounds the evidence was insufficient to prove “penetration” for 
purposes of the statute defining other sexual misconduct. The Court of 
Appeals affirmed, concluding the evidence supports the Level 1 felony 
conviction. We agree with the Court of Appeals and grant transfer to 
provide guidance on the meaning of “penetration” for purposes of “other 
sexual misconduct.”      
Precedent makes clear that proof of the “slightest penetration” of the 
female sex organ, including penetration of the external genitalia, is 
sufficient to sustain a conviction for child molestation based on sexual 
intercourse. Spurlock v. State, 675 N.E.2d 312, 315 (Ind. 1996), on reh’g 
(1997); Dinger v. State, 540 N.E.2d 39, 40 (Ind. 1989). But Boggs argues that 
other sexual misconduct requires proof of “more intrusive acts,” 
comparing the statute defining sexual intercourse as “any” penetration of 
the female sex organ to the statute defining other sexual misconduct as 
“the” penetration of the sex organ. See I.C. §§ 35-31.5-2-302; 35-31.5-2-
221.5. Boggs contends this differing language indicates the legislature 
intended “penetration” to have different meanings for purposes of the 
two statutes.    
Indiana Supreme Court |No. 18S-CR-430 | August 23, 2018 
Page 3 of 3 
We hold that proof of the slightest penetration of the sex organ, 
including penetration of the external genitalia, is sufficient to demonstrate 
a person performed other sexual misconduct with a child. The evidence 
here demonstrates that Boggs committed other sexual misconduct with 
S.H. Accordingly, we affirm his conviction for Level 1 felony child 
molestation. We summarily affirm the Court of Appeals decision in all 
other respects. See Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A)(2).      
 
All Justices concur. 
 
A TT O R N E Y F O R  A PP E LLA N T 
Leanna Weissmann 
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 
A TT O R N E YS F O R  AP P EL L E E 
Curtis T. Hill, Jr. 
Attorney General of Indiana 
Lyubov Gore 
Deputy Attorney General  
Indianapolis, Indiana