Opinion ID: 2916030
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Aggravated Sexual Battery

Text: “Aggravated sexual battery is unlawful sexual contact with a victim by the defendant” and “[f]orce or coercion is used to accomplish the act and the defendant is armed with a weapon or any article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the victim reasonably to believe it to be a weapon” or “[t]he defendant causes bodily injury to the victim.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-504(a)(1), (2) (2010). The “unlawful sexual contact” element of the offense “includes the intentional touching of the victim‟s . . . intimate 23 Count 3 of the indictment alleged that the Defendant “did unlawfully and feloniously kill Starr Lynn Harris in the perpetration of rape, in violation of T.C.A. 39-13-202(a)(2) . . . .” The trial court instructed the jury that one of the essential elements of first degree felony murder was “[t]hat the killing was committed in the perpetration of or the attempt to perpetrate the alleged underlying felony” (emphasis added). The defense did not object to this instruction. We deem harmless any variance between the indictment and the proof adduced at trial, and the Defendant is entitled to no relief on this basis. See State v. Stokes, No. W2010-02622-CCA-R3-CD, 2012 WL 1656918, at -4 (Tenn. Crim. App. May 10, 2012) (defendant entitled to no relief from conviction of first degree felony murder alleged to have been committed during aggravated robbery when jury charged and proof demonstrated that murder was committed during attempted aggravated robbery), perm. appeal denied (Tenn. Aug. 15, 2012); State v. Walker, No. 02C01-9704-CC-00147, 1997 WL 746433, at  (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 3, 1997) (after defendant charged with felony murder during perpetration of robbery, jury instruction including attempt to perpetrate alleged robbery did not entitle defendant to relief because the instruction “did not provide the jury with different elements by which to convict the [defendant] of felony murder”). 34 parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim‟s . . . intimate parts, if that intentional touching can be reasonably construed as being for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification.” Id. § 39-13-501(6) (2010). A victim‟s breasts and inner thighs are intimate parts. Id. § 39-13-501(2). A bruise is a bodily injury. Id. § 39-11-106(a)(2) (2010). As set forth above, the proof established that the victim had bruises to her inner thighs and that a condom containing the Defendant‟s semen was found at the assault location. The victim‟s body was found with her shirt open and her bra pulled down around her waist. The handgun replica and a branch containing hairs consistent with the victim‟s head hair also were found at the assault location. This proof permitted the jury to infer that the Defendant and the victim both were at the assault location and that, using the handgun replica as a means of force or coercion, the Defendant intentionally touched the victim‟s inner thighs, causing bruising, and that he intentionally touched the clothing covering the victim‟s breasts. This proof also permitted the jury to infer that the Defendant intentionally touched the victim‟s thighs and clothing for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification. Accordingly, the proof was sufficient to support the Defendant‟s conviction of aggravated sexual battery. The Defendant is not entitled to relief on this basis.