{7} Following a police investigation into the above incidents, Defendant was charged, indicted, tried, and convicted of eight separate counts of CSCM by use of coercion by a person in a position of authority (1) for touching Jessica’s breasts during her first massage session, (2) for touching her breasts, (3) vulva, and (4) buttocks at her second session, and (5-8) for touching Stephanie’s breasts on four separate occasions. Additional facts, as established at trial, will be introduced as necessary in our analysis below. DISCUSSION Sufficiency of the Evidence {8} In order to convict Defendant of CSCM by use of coercion by a person in a position of authority, the State had to prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) Defendant touched or applied for , 60 (Ct.App.1991) (<HOLDING>); State v. Gillette, 102 N.M. 695, 702, 699
holding that assistant principal used position of authority to gain the trust of the victims to obtain the opportunity to touch the victims and to cause them to submit to his unlawful touching holding that employer controlled the victims will at least in part by using his position as the victims employer holding that the employee must at least provide his employer with enough information for the employer to be put on notice that the fmla is a consideration holding that the circuit court properly allowed the victims schoolteacher to testify as to the victims general reputation for truthfulness holding that jury may consider victims mental capacity in determining whether defendant acted with victims knowledge and consent