Opinion ID: 1880670
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Sexual Battery Charge

Text: We hold that Boyd's motion for judgment of acquittal as to the sexual battery charge was properly denied by the trial court. Section 794.011(3), Florida Statutes (1997), provides in pertinent part: A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older, without that person's consent, and in the process thereof uses or threatens to use a deadly weapon or uses actual physical force likely to cause serious personal injury commits a life felony.... Sexual battery is defined as oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another. § 794.011(1)(h), Fla. Stat. (1997). Consent is defined as intelligent, knowing, and voluntary consent and does not include coerced submission. `Consent' shall not be deemed or construed to mean the failure by the alleged victim to offer physical resistance to the offender. § 794.011(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). The State presented substantial evidence that Boyd sexually battered Dacosta, including evidence that Boyd and Dacosta did not know each other before she encountered Boyd while looking for a ride back to her vehicle after obtaining gas at the Texaco station; that Boyd's semen was on Dacosta's inner thighs; that Dacosta's blood was in Boyd's apartment; and that Boyd's DNA was in material found under Dacosta's fingernails. The State also presented testimony establishing the chain of custody of the evidence collected, providing evidence against Boyd's theory that Detective Bukata planted evidence so that it would match Boyd's and Dacosta's DNA. Bruising on Dacosta's inner thighs and vaginal area was consistent with either consensual or nonconsensual intercourse. Dacosta was last seen alive with Boyd. Viewing this evidence in a light most favorable to the State, the evidence does create inconsistencies with Boyd's theory of innocence, and the judgment of acquittal was therefore properly denied. Orme v. State, 677 So.2d 258, 262 (Fla.1996). Any question as to whether the evidence was sufficient to overcome all hypotheses of innocence was for the jury to decide. Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362, 366 (Fla.1994). We hold that there was competent, substantial evidence to support the jury's guilty verdict for sexual battery.