## Facts

- During a school bus ride, D.B., a male student, sat next to a female student.
- The female student reported that D.B. put his hand underneath her shirt and touched her breasts.
- The student also reported that D.B. put his hand down her pants. In a written statement later provided to police, she stated his hand reached “to her ankle” and that he was “rough” when he reached under her clothing.
- The student told D.B. to stop, but he did not stop when she asked.
- After the incident, D.B. threatened to harm the student if she told anyone what happened.
- About a week later, the student reported the incident to a school guidance counselor.
- The student wrote a statement describing the incident and gave it to the police.
- A school bus surveillance video from the day of the incident showed D.B. and the student sitting together but did not show signs of a struggle or altercation.
- The State of New Hampshire filed a juvenile delinquency petition alleging conduct that would constitute misdemeanor sexual assault.
- After the close of the evidence at a bench trial, the trial court denied D.B.’s motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence and found D.B. delinquent.
- D.B. appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, arguing the evidence was insufficient, focusing on the surveillance video and claimed conflicts in the student’s account.

## Issues

1. Whether, viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the State’s favor, a rational factfinder could find beyond a reasonable doubt that D.B. committed misdemeanor sexual assault, even though the bus surveillance video did not show a struggle or altercation.

## Decision

- The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the delinquency adjudication.
- The court held that the student’s testimony and written statement, if credited, were enough to prove the elements of misdemeanor sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The court rejected D.B.’s argument that the surveillance video required dismissal, reasoning that the video’s failure to show a struggle did not make the student’s account impossible or legally insufficient.
- The court declined to reweigh the evidence or second-guess the trial court’s credibility determinations.

## Legal Principles

- On a sufficiency challenge in a juvenile delinquency case, the reviewing court considers the evidence, and all reasonable inferences from it, in the light most favorable to the State, and asks whether any rational trier of fact could find the charged elements proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The trial court, sitting as factfinder, decides credibility and resolves conflicts in testimony; the appellate court does not retry the case or reassess witness credibility.
- The testimony of a single witness, if believed, can be enough to support a finding of guilt (or delinquency) beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Video evidence that does not clearly depict the alleged conduct does not necessarily defeat the State’s proof, especially where the alleged conduct could occur without obvious external movement or where the video angle or quality may not capture under-clothing touching.
- Apparent inconsistencies between a witness’s account and other evidence ordinarily raise fact questions for the trial court, not a basis for reversal on sufficiency review.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court affirmed D.B.’s delinquency finding for misdemeanor sexual assault because the complaining student’s testimony and written statement provided evidence of nonconsensual sexual touching, and the bus video’s lack of a visible struggle did not render her account impossible or require the appellate court to overturn the trial court’s credibility and fact findings.


In re D.B., 53 A.3d 646 (2012)