C.D.H. v. State

I respectfully dissent. Although the evidence, admittedly, is not overwhelming with regard to the age of the defendant juvenile, I believe there is sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

At the outset, I note that I agree with the majority’s interpretation of Indiana Code Section 35-42-4-3(b). I further agree that this reading “puts the child molestation statute in harmony with the Indiana statutes proscribing vicarious sexual gratification, sexual conduct in the presence of a minor, child solicitation, child seduction, and sexual misconduct with a minor, all of which require that the…