D'PAFFO v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The crime of child molesting, as charged in Count 1 of the information is defined by statute, in relevant part, as follows: A person who, with a child under fourteen (14) years of age, performs or submits to deviate sexual conduct commits child molesting, a Class “B” felony. However, the offense is a Class “A” felony if it is committed by a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age. To convict the defendant of child molesting as a Class “A” felony, as charged, the State must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. The defendant, James David Jaco, 2. Being at least 21 years of age, 3. Did perform deviate sexual conduct, 4. With C. J., a child under the age of fourteen (14) years. If the State fails to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty of child molesting as charged in Count 1. If the State does prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant, James David Jaco guilty of child molesting as charged in Count 1. Jaco did not object to either instruction during his trial. But in this appeal, he argues that “[in] failing to instruct the jury regarding the mens rea element of the offense — with intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desires of Jaco or the child — the trial court committed fundamental error.” In analyzing this claim, the Court of Appeals said: Jaco was convicted of child molesting under Ind.Code § 35-42-4-3(a) which relates to a person who “perf”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jaco v. State of Indiana