Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Amir Husain was charged with two counts of criminal solicitation of an individual whom he believed to be younger than 17. The trial lasted for three days. The jury acquitted Husain on the first count. Over the next day and a half, however, the jury sent out nine notes to the judge asking for clarification of various points of law, asking to hear certain testimony again, and informing the court that they were deadlocked over the second count. Over Husain’s objection, the trial court granted a mistrial on the second count. Because the state intends to retry Husain on the second count, Husain now raises double jeopardy and collateral estoppel issues. Husain claims the trial court abused its discretion for several reasons. He contends the statute under which he was charged is “unique” because 1. it makes it an offense to solicit a minor to commit an act that is illegal under a different criminal statute; 2. it is illegal to solicit an adult if a defendant “thinks” he is soliciting a minor; and 3. the statute refers to minors as those under the age of 17, while certain of the incorporated offenses refer to minors as those under the age of 14. He asserts the evidence was complex, because it involved instant messaging on computers, which Husain contends may be difficult to understand by jurors who are not computer literate. Finally, defendant asserts the charge must have been complicated and difficult for the jury to understand, because of all the notes the jury sent out. Husain argues that the jury should have been allowed “another day or so” of deliberations, despite its statement to the court that it could not reach a verdict. HOLDING:Affirmed. The court disagrees with Husain’s characterization of the record. The court notes that the trial court sent the jury back to deliberate even after it initially deadlocked, but the jury later said that the longer it stayed together, the farther apart on the issue its members became. Husain’s double jeopardy rights were not violated. The second count against Husain is not barred by collateral estoppel, the court finds, noting that Husain admitted to participating in a sexually oriented online chat with “Mary,” whom Husain believed to be under 17 and with whom he intended to have sex. “Mary” said she was 13, but Husain claimed he did not believe her, claiming instead to believe that she was an older woman playing the role of a young girl. He played along with the game, because he wanted to meet her and have sex with her. Based on his admission that he wanted to have sex with “Mary,” Husain argues that the jury was required to determine only a single ultimate fact � whether he solicited an individual whom he believed to be younger than 17 � and implicit in the jury’s acquittal is the conclusion that he did not attempt such a solicitation for any purpose. “We agree with defendant that his intention to have sexual intercourse, oral sex, or sexual contact with”Mary’ were not disputed issues, and that the age he believed”Mary’ to be was a disputed issue. However, we disagree with defendant that the age he believed”Mary’ to be was relevant only to the jury’s determination of whether he solicited her to commit an offense.” The jury’s acquittal on the first count may have been based on its finding that Husain did not intend to “cause the penetration of the female sexual organ of a child” younger than 14, the court notes. Or, as Husain argues, the jury’s acquittal may have been based on its finding that he did not request, command or attempt to induce someone he believed to be younger than 17. With these conflicting possibilities, the court says it cannot conclude the jury necessarily grounded its verdict upon the finding defendant now seeks to foreclose from retrial. OPINION:Marion, J.; L�pez, C.J., Marion and Speedlin, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.