State v. Washington, 34PA22, ___ N.C. ___ (May. 23, 2024)

In this Orange County case, the Supreme Court affirmed an unpublished Court of Appeals decision upholding defendant’s convictions for sexual offense and indecent liberties with a child. The Court determined that Rule of Evidence 412 bars admission of prior nonconsensual sexual activity. 

In October of 2018, the victim told her mother that defendant, her stepfather, was sexually abusing her. During the investigation, the victim was interviewed by a SAFEChild social worker. In this SAFEChild interview, the victim recounted another incident where she was sexually abused by a teenager. At trial, defendant moved to admit the portion of the SAFEChild interview that referenced the teenager. The trial court denied this motion under Rule 412. At the Court of Appeals, defendant argued prejudicial error by excluding the interview as “sexual abuse does not fall within the definition of sexual behavior under Rule 412.” Slip Op. at 4 (cleaned up). The Court of Appeals disagreed, upholding the conviction in an unpublished decision.  

Considering defendant’s argument, the Supreme Court noted that “[s]exual activity . . . is not defined in Rule 412 or elsewhere in the North Carolina Rules of Evidence.” Id. at 6. However, the Court concluded that when looking at the relevant definition of “sexual behavior” in Rule 412, it was clear the intent was to differentiate between the sex acts at issue and all other activity, and “the definition does not differentiate between consensual and nonconsensual sex acts, nor does it tend to exclude nonconsensual sex.” Id. This led the Court to determine that “generally, all evidence of a complainant’s sexual behavior, other than the sexual act at issue, is irrelevant regardless of whether that sexual behavior was consensual or nonconsensual.” Id. at 7.