Court Opinion

ID: 9706076
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 01:31:01.426239+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:26:50.178548
License: Public Domain

SCHWELB, Associate Judge,
concurring.
Whenever there is even the slightest uncertainty that the conduct of which a defendant has been convicted is a crime, I would prefer to go the last mile to be absolutely certain. More specifically, I would remand to the trial judge so that she could clarify her finding and remove any lingering doubt about its meaning. But in this case, any uncertainty about what the judge meant is surely minimal— perhaps a scintilla, or a fraction of one. Accordingly, I join the judgment and the opinion of the court (written by me). In the most unlikely event that the judge did not mean to find that Carter sexually touched KD.’s inner thigh, I am confident that she will act to avoid a miscarriage of justice by immediately notifying counsel so that appropriate steps can be taken on *310Carter’s behalf. I am also confident that, if it were to turn out that the fraction of a scintilla was indeed the fact — if, in other words, the judge were to disclose that the acts of which she found Carter guilty did not consist of conduct proscribed by the statute — then the government would do its duty and would, in the interests of justice, consent to the vacation of Carter’s conviction.