State v. Barela, 2015 UT 22 - Misleading Jury Instructions Overturns Conviction

The defendant’s conviction was overturned based on the ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel did not object to a misleading jury instruction.

State v. Barela, 2015 UT 22

An appeal from a conviction of first-degree rape. Barela claims that his counsel was ineffective in a variety of ways and that the district court erred in refusing to subpoena for the victim's medical records. He also challenged the sufficiency of the evidence that the victim had not consented to sex.

The Court reversed based on the ineffective assistance of counsel claim because the defense attorney did not object to a jury instruction that misstated the mens rea requirement as applied to first-degree rape. 

The trial court gave the following jury instruction: “1. The defendant, Robert K. Barela, 2. Intentionally or knowingly; 3. Had sexual intercourse with K.M.; 4. That said act of intercourse was without the consent of K.M.”

The Court ruled that the instruction was in error because it implied that the mens rea aspect applied only to the act of sexual intercourse, and not to the victim's nonconsent. 

http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/supopin/Barela150130.pdf