State v. Marshall
State v. Marshall, 2025 UT App 79 (Mortensen, J.)
Criminal/Criminal Procedure
The Utah Court of Appeals held:
- The district court’s inadequate inquiry into Defendant’s absence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Trial counsel’s failure to object to expert witness’s legal conclusion was not prejudicial.
- Practice tip: A district court’s inadequate inquiry into Defendant’s absence is prejudicial where it has a discernible impact on the jury verdict.