The Appellate Group

State v. Haar

State v. Haar, 2021 UT App 109 (Appleby, J.)


Defendant appealed his convictions for murder and child abuse, arguing witnesses (including police witnesses) had improperly given opinions on the veracity of Defendant’s statements, as well as that the prosecutor had made improper statements in closing argument. The court of appeals affirmed:

  • Defendant was not prejudiced by witnesses expressing their opinions on the veracity of his statements, including because, in the context here, the challenged testimony would not have had an effect on the jury’s view of the evidence. And Defendant was not prejudiced by the prosecutor’s closing because “[t]he challenged statements were a minimal part of the State’s closing argument and rebuttal, and the evidence itself was overwhelming.”

Read the full court opinion