## Facts

- An eight-year-old child engaged in repeated sexual acts with two other children of roughly the same age.
- A juvenile complaint alleged the child was delinquent by reason of rape under Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.02(A)(2), based on “sexual conduct” as defined by Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.01(A).
- The juvenile court found the child delinquent by reason of rape and imposed a juvenile disposition.
- The court of appeals reversed, relying on an asserted common-law rebuttable presumption that a child below a certain age or below puberty is incapable of committing rape.
- The state sought review to determine whether any such presumption exists in Ohio and whether the evidence supported the adjudication.

## Issues

1. Whether Ohio law recognizes a common-law rebuttable presumption that a prepubescent child (or a child under a specified age) is incapable of committing rape.
2. If no such presumption applies, whether the evidence was sufficient to support the juvenile court’s delinquency adjudication for rape under Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.02(A)(2).

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Ohio reversed the court of appeals and reinstated the juvenile court’s delinquency adjudication.
- The court held Ohio does not recognize a common-law presumption that a child is incapable of committing rape based solely on age or puberty.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient to support the finding that the child was delinquent by reason of rape under Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.02(A)(2).

## Legal Principles

- Ohio rape statutes and definitions (Ohio Rev. Code §§ 2907.01(A), 2907.02) are treated as comprehensive and do not include an age-based common-law presumption of incapacity to commit rape.
- In juvenile delinquency proceedings, the state may establish rape by proving the statutory elements, including “sexual conduct” and that the offender “purposely” compelled submission by force or threat of force under Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.02(A)(2).
- A juvenile’s young age does not categorically bar a delinquency adjudication for rape; the inquiry remains whether the evidence proves the elements beyond a reasonable doubt under ordinary sufficiency standards.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Ohio rejected an age- or puberty-based common-law presumption that would prevent rape adjudications against very young children and reinstated the delinquency finding because the record contained sufficient evidence of the statutory elements of rape.


In re Washington, 75 Ohio St. 3d 390 (Ohio 1996)