The Appellate Group

State v. Kent

State v. Kent, 2026 UT App 96 (Harris, J.)

Criminal Law

The Utah Court of Appeals held:

(1) The district court did not err in denying Defendant’s directed verdict motion or motion to dismiss based on entrapment.

(2) Defendant did not received ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to object to [1] alleged inadmissible credibility opinion, and [2] officer’s testimony regarding Defendant’s intent.

(3) Any error regarding the court’s limitation of evidence of “catfishing” was harmless.

Practice tip:

The question of whether to take the entrapment issue away from the jury is always a question of law, no matter the point in time at which the inquiry is made.

Read the full court opinion