Mayhan v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Mayhan’s convictions arising from nonconsensual oral sex because the evidence permitted a rational jury to infer the required physical union from the victim’s testimony that Mayhan ejaculated in her mouth. Because Mayhan did not move for a directed verdict or judgment of acquittal, the Court reviewed both insufficiency claims for plain error and found none. The Court also held that the jury could credit Mayhan’s admission that oral sex occurred while rejecting his claim that it was consensual.