In 2014 Jason Johnson was charged in Fall River District Court with (1) statutory rape of a child and (2) indecent assault and battery on a person under the age of fourteen.
Prior to trial, prosecutors filed a nolle prosequi dismissing the rape charge. They also amended the remaining charge to indecent assault and battery on a person over fourteen.
At trial prosecutors showed that in 2012 the victim, who was 14, spent the night with Johnson and his girlfriend in their apartment. Johnson’s girlfriend was the victim’s aunt.
The victim slept in the same bed as Johnson and he kissed her during the night. The next day, after Johnson’s girlfriend left the apartment, he confronted the victim and again began to kiss her.
At first the victim did not object. But as Johnson became more aggressive she demanded that he stop. He ignored her, removed her pants, and ultimately penetrated her vagina with “something.”
The victim could not say exactly what went into her, but shortly after the incident her shorts “were covered in blood.”
The jury found Johnson guilty of indecent assault and battery. He received a sentence of 2.5 years. The first 18 months would be served at the house of corrections. The remaining 12 months were suspended for five years.
Prior to sentencing Johnson, the trial judge said
The testimony that I’ve heard essentially is a rape and the jury has found you guilty of indecent assault and battery.
Johnson filed an appeal claiming that the judge improperly sentenced him for the rape charge which had been dismissed.
The Appeals Court acknowledged that the judge’s comment was improper but still upheld the sentence.
While the defendant correctly observes that ambiguity as to whether a defendant has been improperly sentenced as punishment for other offenses creates a sufficient concern about the appearance of justice, here the judge’s comment, while susceptible to the interpretation the defendant gives it, did not create an ambiguity requiring resentencing. A judge may properly consider a variety of factors in fashioning an appropriate sentence including the defendant’s behavior, character, background, and, perhaps most important, the nature of the offense and the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime. Although it would have been preferable if the judge had not referred to the crime of rape, ultimately, we view the judge’s comment as one relating to the manner in which the indecent assault and battery was committed and the seriousness of the facts of the case. (Citations and quotations omitted.)
The full text of the opinion is attached below.