State v. Farmer
State v. Farmer, 2025 UT App 57 (Orme, J.)
Criminal Law
The Utah Court of Appeals held:
- The trial court did not exceed its discretion when it denied Defendant’s rule 804(b)(3) motions to admit written and verbal statements, nor when it denied his request for a compulsion instruction on the obstructing justice charge.
- Counsel was not ineffective for not raising the rule 804(b)(3) motion for a third time during trial, or for failing to request a proper unanimity instruction on the obstruction charge.
- Practice tip: The prejudice standard is higher in cases where a unanimity issue is preserved because, as with other constitutional errors, the lack of a proper unanimity instruction carries a rebuttable presumption of prejudice. But where a unanimity issue is not preserved, the defendant carries the burden of showing prejudice.