PEOPLE OF MI V JASON WESTLEY WOLBERS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
August 24, 2004
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 246975
Ottawa Circuit Court
LC No. 01-25240-FH
JASON WESTLEY WOLBERS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Whitbeck, C.J., and Owens and Schuette, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct,
(CSC I), MCL 750.520b(1)(g), for which he was sentenced to two to fifteen years’
imprisonment. Defendant appeals as of right. We affirm.
I. FACTS
Complainant testified that on June 6, 2001, she and a friend went to defendant’s residence
where they played drinking games and smoked marijuana. According to defendant and other
witnesses at trial, complainant participated in a game of strip poker and was voluntarily naked at
some point during the game. Complainant testified that around 1:00 a.m., she began to feel very
weak and tired. She fell asleep with clothes on in a sleeping bag on the couch. Defendant was
sitting on the opposite end of the couch watching a movie. Complainant testified that when she
awoke, she saw defendant’s shadow over her. She testified that her bra was undone and he was
touching her breasts. She told him to stop and then fell back asleep. Complainant testified that
the next time she awoke she could not see anyone, but experienced pain in her vaginal area
which felt like bending fingers. She then fell back asleep. The last time she awoke, the
complainant testified that she was very weak and that her vaginal area was sore and wet. She
was on the floor with her pants and underwear pulled down and her shirt lifted up. She asked
defendant why her clothes were off, to which he replied, “Well, why did you take them off?”
Complainant testified that she went into the bathroom with her friend and asked her to touch her
vaginal area because she was scared and did not know why that area was wet. Complainant was
taken for testing at the YWCA, where the examining nurse found redness to her labia minora and
the posterior fourchette and several lacerations to the base of the vagina and the anus. The
medical experts introduced at trial could not conclusively say that these injuries were evidence of
penetration, but also stated that these injuries were not inconsistent with penetration or an
-1-
attempt thereof. Defendant’s seminal fluid was found during testing on complainant’s
underwear and on an anal swab.
II. SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE
Defendant argues that there was insufficient evidence that he sexually penetrated the
complainant. We disagree.
A. Standard of Review
This Court reviews a “challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a bench trial de
novo and in a light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether the trial court could
have found that the essential elements of the crime were proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”
People v Sherman-Huffman, 241 Mich App 264, 265; 615 NW2d 776 (2000), aff’d 466 Mich 39;
642 NW2d 339 (2002). Special deference is given to the trial court’s credibility determinations.
Id. at 267.
B. Analysis
Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on the ground that the only
evidence supporting the allegation of penetration was complainant’s testimony that she felt pain
in her vaginal area, although she could not see defendant but only what appeared to be his
shadow, and that when she awoke her vaginal area was wet. Defendant also noted that the
examining nurse and doctor could not say with any certainty that there was penetration into the
vaginal or anal openings, only that there was redness to the labia minora and lacerations between
the vagina and anus. However, the “[t]estimony of a complainant that the defendant engaged in
sexual penetration is sufficient evidence from which a jury could infer that penetration took
place.” People v Reinhardt, 167 Mich App 584, 598; 423 NW2d 275 (1988), vacated on other
grounds by 436 Mich 866; 460 NW2d 226 (1990). And, in a prosecution for CSC I, evidence of
penetration of the labia majora is sufficient to support a finding of sexual penetration. People v
Bristol, 115 Mich App 236, 238; 320 NW2d 229 (1981). Thus, the complainant’s testimony
indicating that defendant penetrated her genital area together with the physical evidence
indicative of penetration was sufficient to support defendant’s conviction.
Although defendant claims all sexual contact between the complainant and him was
consensual, the trial court found that defendant sexually penetrated and injured the complainant
while she was helpless and unable to defend herself. Deferring to the trial court’s findings of
credibility and viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, ShermanHuffman, supra at 265-267, we hold that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant’s
CSC I conviction.
Affirmed.
/s/ William C. Whitbeck
/s/ Donald S. Owens
/s/ Bill Schuette
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
