State v. Samora
State v. Samora, 2021 UT App 29 (Harris, J.)
Defendant was convicted for aggravated robbery of a convenience store. On appeal, he argued among other things that the trial court erred in admitting reconstructed photos and three clips from his jail phone calls to his wife. The court of appeals affirmed, holding:
- The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the reconstructed comparison photos as they were sufficiently authenticated pursuant to Rule 901.
- There was no plain error or ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to object to the admission of the jail phone calls, as there did not appear to be error in admitting them, let alone plain error, the probative value was not outweighed by unfair prejudice, and the spousal privilege did not apply.