What constitutes a position of special trust under Utah's aggravated sexual abuse statute? State v. Rowley Explained

The Utah Court of Appeals in State v. Rowley addressed a critical question regarding the scope of aggravated sexual abuse prosecutions under Utah Code section 76-5-404.1(4)(h): what evidence suffices to establish that a defendant held a position of special trust over a child victim?

Background and Facts

Defendant Rowley was convicted of two counts of aggravated sexual abuse after molesting an eleven-year-old girl who frequently spent nights at his home where his daughter lived. The victim had slept over approximately sixteen times with her mother’s permission. During the abuse incident, Rowley told the victim to go to bed, later entered the bedroom, and molested her while lying between the victim and his daughter. The victim testified that Rowley had previously babysat and supervised her during visits.

Key Legal Issues

Rowley challenged his convictions, arguing insufficient evidence supported finding he held a position of special trust under section 76-5-404.1(4)(h). He contended the statute required proof of a “personal, familiar or confident dependant relationship” rather than merely being an adult present in the home. The State argued Rowley qualified both as a “baby-sitter” specifically listed in the statute and under the general definition requiring a position of authority enabling undue influence.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court rejected Rowley’s narrow interpretation, emphasizing that section 76-5-404.1(4)(h) focuses on the defendant’s “position of authority” rather than requiring an intimate relationship. The court found two pathways to establish special trust: specific enumerated positions like “baby-sitter,” or demonstrating a position of authority enabling undue influence. Reviewing the evidence under the sufficiency standard, the court found reasonable minds could conclude Rowley held authority over the victim as her best friend’s father and supervising adult in a home where she frequently stayed overnight.

Practice Implications

This decision significantly broadens potential aggravated sexual abuse prosecutions by establishing that formal caregiving relationships are unnecessary. Defense practitioners should focus evidence on the defendant’s actual supervisory role and authority rather than arguing about relationship intimacy. The court’s analysis suggests that routine supervision of children during sleepovers or similar circumstances may suffice for enhanced penalties, making careful case evaluation essential in plea negotiations.