Opinion ID: 2166128
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Evidence Was Sufficient to Support Conviction for First Degree Sexual Assault

Text: Thurman first contends the district court erred in finding there was sufficient evidence to support his conviction for first degree sexual assault. The basis for Thurman's argument is that A.W.'s testimony was not credible, particularly given the lack of physical evidence indicating she was sexually assaulted. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-319 (Reissue 1995) provides that first degree sexual assault is committed when [a]ny person . . . subjects another person to sexual penetration. . . without consent of the victim . . . . Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-318(6) (Cum.Supp. 2004) defines sexual penetration as sexual intercourse in its ordinary meaning, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any intrusion, however slight, of any part of the actor's or victim's body or any object manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal openings of the victim's body . . . . A.W. testified that Thurman penetrated her vagina with his penis, that he anally penetrated her, and that he forced her to perform oral sex on him. Viewed in a light most favorable to the State, A.W.'s testimony is sufficient to support Thurman's conviction for first degree sexual assault. That A.W. testified Thurman was unable to maintain an erection is inconsequential as the definition of penetration includes any intrusion, however slight. Moreover, Thurman's contention that A.W.'s testimony is not credible is without merit, as this court does not pass on the credibility of witnesses when assessing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction. [16] Accordingly, we conclude the evidence was sufficient to support Thurman's conviction for first degree sexual assault.