Opinion ID: 2450640
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Sufficiency of Evidence of Second Rape of A.W.

Text: Race also argues that A.W.'s testimony was insufficient to persuade a rational factfinder that more than one act of vaginal penetration occurred. When [the] sufficiency of evidence is challenged in a criminal case, our standard of review is whether, after review of all the evidence, examined in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we are convinced that a rational factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Prine, 287 Kan. 713, 738, 200 P.3d 1 (2009) (citing State v. Vasquez, 287 Kan. 40, 59, 194 P.3d 563 [2008]; State v. Morton, 283 Kan. 464, 474, 153 P.3d 532 [2007]). This court has often stated that the testimony of the victim alone can be sufficient to sustain a rape conviction without further corroboration as long as the evidence is clear and convincing and is not so incredible and improbable as to defy belief. Prine, 287 Kan. at 739, 200 P.3d 1 (citing State v. Borthwick, 255 Kan. 899, 904, 880 P.2d 1261 [1994]; State v. Cooper, 252 Kan. 340, 347, 845 P.2d 631 [1993]). K.S.A. 21-3502(a)(2) defines rape as sexual intercourse with a child who is under 14 years of age. K.S.A. 21-3501(1) defines [s]exual intercourse for purposes of rape to include: any penetration of the female sex organ by a finger, the male sex organ or any object. Any penetration, however slight, is sufficient to constitute sexual intercourse. In her trial testimony, A.W. explained that there was an inside and an outside to her front private part and said that, at her aunt's apartment, Race pulled her pants halfway down and rubbed the inside of this private part up and down with his finger. She then testified that this happened again in Langdon; Race had touched her the same way as he had at her aunt's apartment. A.W. also testified that her sister, T.R., saw Race touch her at the Langdon house. T.R.'s testimony confirmed that she had seen Race rub A.W. with his finger at the Langdon house, as well as at her aunt's house and at the 10th Street house. We have no hesitation in holding that A.W.'s description of the penetration of her vagina at her aunt's home and her statement that the same type of touch occurred in Langdon constituted sufficient evidence to enable a rational factfinder to find Race guilty of the second count of rape. Although not required, T.R.'s eyewitness testimony provided some corroboration of A.W.'s story. Race is not entitled to reversal of his second rape conviction.