State v. Wallace

“The ability to consent consists of two related concepts: (1) understanding the nature of sexual conduct and (2) exercising judgment and making choices based on that understanding." Reed, 339 Or at 244.

Defendant appealed a conviction of rape in the first degree, two counts of sodomy in the first degree, and one count of sexual abuse in the first degree. Defendant assigned error to the trial court for denying his motion of judgment of acquittal on counts two through five. On appeal, Defendant argued the State failed to provide evidence showing the victim’s mental disability prevented her from consenting to sexual activity. In response, the State argued that the victim’s simplistic understanding of what sexual activity was, and her passive compliance to Defendant’s sexual advances met that burden. “The ability to consent consists of two related concepts: (1) understanding the nature of sexual conduct and (2) exercising judgment and making choices based on that understanding." Reed, 339 Or. at 244. The Court found that the evidence in the record did not support the trial court's finding that the victim could not understand the nature of the defendant's actions due to mental disability. The Court reasoned that while evidence showed the Defendant took advantage of the victim’s vulnerability and curiosity about sex, the victim still understood that Defendant’s conduct towards her was sexual in nature, and that her mental disability did not preclude her from consenting to Defendant’s advances. Counts two through five reversed; remanded for sentencing; otherwise affirmed.