Summary 2007 WY 130

Summary of Decision issued August 10, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Garay v. State

Citation: 2007 WY 130

Docket Number: 06-220

Appeal from the District Court of Washakie County, the Honorable Gary P. Hartman, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Jack Vreeland of Evanston, Wyoming; and Robert M. Archuleta of Salt Lake City, Utah. Argument by Mr. Archuleta.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Patrick J. Crank, Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Cathleen D. Parker, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Ms. Parker.

Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to support Appellant’s conviction for third-degree sexual assault.

Facts/Discussion: Appellant was convicted of third-degree sexual assault and was sentenced to incarceration for a term of 13 to 15 years.
Standard of review: The critical inquiry for the Court is whether after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Court stated they would affirm Appellant’s conviction because his arguments were based almost exclusively upon inferences he wished the jury had drawn form the evidence, rather than the inferences the jury apparently did draw; the focus of the Appellant’s brief and oral argument was upon the supposed lack of qualifications of one of the State’s expert witnesses, despite the fact he did not object below and waived a Daubert hearing; and the trial record contains not just sufficient evidence but abundant evidence of Appellant’s guilt.

Holding: There was sufficient evidence for the jury to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that Appellant was guilty of third-degree sexual assault.

Affirmed.

C.J. Voigt delivered the opinion of the court.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/33mk4z .