Home Table of Contents

WPIC 44.21 Child Molestation—First Degree—Sexual Contact with a Child—Elements

11 WAPRAC WPIC 44.21Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal

11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 44.21 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part VII. Sex Crimes
WPIC CHAPTER 44. Rape of a Child—Child Molestation—Sexual Misconduct with a Minor
WPIC 44.21 Child Molestation—First Degree—Sexual Contact with a Child—Elements
To convict the defendant of the crime of child molestation in the first degree, each of the following elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That on or about (date), the defendant had sexual contact with (name of child);
(2) That (name of child) was less than twelve years old at the time of the sexual contact and was not married to the defendant;
(3) That (name of child) was at least thirty-six months younger than the defendant; and
(4) That this act occurred in the State of Washington.
If you find from the evidence that each of these elements has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of guilty.
On the other hand, if, after weighing all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt as to any one of these elements, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction for cases of first degree child molestation in which the defendant is charged with having sexual contact with a child. Use WPIC 44.21.01 (Child Molestation—First Degree—Causing Sexual Contact Between Children—Elements) instead of the instruction above, for cases in which the defendant is charged with committing the crime by causing one child to have sexual contact with a second child.
Use WPIC 45.07 (Sexual Contact—Definition) and WPIC 45.06 (Married—Definition) with this instruction.
If there is an issue as to the defendant's knowledge or belief regarding the age of the child or if the statutory defense is in issue, use WPIC 19.04.02 (Child Molestation—Defense) with this instruction.
For cases involving multiple acts, use WPIC 4.25 (Jury Unanimity—Several Distinct Criminal Acts—Petrich Instruction) or WPIC 4.26 (Jury Unanimity—Several Distinct Criminal Acts—Election to Specify a Particular Act). See WPIC 44.00 (Introduction—Sex Offenses Against Children) and the Notes on Use and Comments to WPIC 4.25 (Jury Unanimity—Several Distinct Criminal Acts—Petrich Instruction) and WPIC 4.26 (Jury Unanimity—Several Distinct Criminal Acts—Election to Specify a Particular Act) for further discussion.
For a discussion of the phrase “this act” in the jurisdictional element, see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use to WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
COMMENT
RCW 9A.44.083.
The instruction is limited to cases in which the defendant is charged with having sexual contact with a child. WPIC 44.21.01 (Child Molestation—First Degree—Causing Sexual Contact Between Children—Elements) addresses the infrequent case in which the defendant is charged with causing one child to have sexual contact with another child.
RCW 9A.44.030(2) and (3)(e) create a defense to a charge of child molestation in the first degree if the defendant reasonably believed, based upon declarations as to age by the victim, that the victim was at least 12 or was less than 36 months younger than the defendant. The statute does not create a similar defense regarding the age of the person caused to have sexual contact with a child of less than 12 years old. For a detailed discussion of the defense and burden of proof issues relating to it, see the Comment to WPIC 19.04.02 (Child Molestation—Defense).
Combining the requirements of RCW 9A.44.083(1) and RCW 9A.44.010(2), the court in State v. BJS, 72 Wn.App. 368, 371, 864 P.2d 432 (1994), described the elements of first degree child molestation as: “(1) a touching of the sexual or intimate parts of a person, (2) for the purpose of sexual gratification, (3) a victim less than 12 years old, (4) a perpetrator at least 36 months older than the victim, and (5) the perpetrator and victim are not married.” In B.J.S. the defendant's conviction was reversed because the trial court had failed to find a crucial element, i.e., that the touching was done for the purpose of sexual gratification.
When the evidence was that the defendant touched the victim through a blanket and clothing, the State was required to offer proof that he touched her for the purpose of sexual gratification. The defendant was not, however, entitled to a specific jury instruction to that effect. A jury instruction requiring the State to prove sexual contact, and a second instruction defining sexual contact as touching of sexual or intimate parts of a person “done for the purpose of satisfying sexual desire of either party” were sufficient. State v. Veliz, 76 Wn.App. 775, 888 P.2d 189 (1995). See WPIC 45.07 (Sexual Contact—Definition). In State v. Lorenz, 152 Wn.2d 22, 93 P.3d 133 (2004), the court affirmed prior decisions holding that sexual gratification is a term used in defining “sexual contact” rather than a separate element of the crime of child molestation.
First degree child molestation and first degree child rape are not the “same offense” for double jeopardy purposes. State v. Jones, 71 Wn.App. 798, 825, 863 P.2d 85 (1993). Nor is first degree child molestation a lesser included offense of first degree child rape. State v. Saiz, 63 Wn.App. 1, 816 P.2d 92 (1991).
[Current as of December 2019.]
End of Document