State v. Hunt
State v. Hunt, 2024 UT App 180 (Orme, J.)
Criminal
Defendant appealed his convictions, arguing he received ineffective assistance of counsel and was entitled to a mistrial. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed, holding:
- Counsel did not perform deficiently by eliciting testimony about Defendant’s prior convictions.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Defendant’s motion for a mistrial.
- Defendant did not preserve the issue of prosecutorial misconduct as a basis for a mistrial.
- Practice tip: The decision to deal with prior convictions upfront to build credibility and minimize the prejudicial impact of conviction is often a sound strategic decision.