State v. Suhail
State v. Suhail, 2023 UT App 15 (Tenney, J.)
After a man was stabbed 39 times and killed, a mutual friend saw Suhail leaving the man’s apartment wearing red shoes. Soon after the man’s death, Suhail had lots of cash and a large stash of drugs that he began selling. At trial, among other things, a shoe print expert was called to testify that the bloody shoe prints were consistent with shoes Suhail owned. Suhail admitted evidence that the man’s neighbor had a history of violence with knives. Suhail was convicted of murder. On appeal, he asks for review of a number of determinations, as well as a remand to develop a factual record to support a claim that his trial counsel was ineffective. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions and denied his request for a rule 23B remand, holding among other things:
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to exclude evidence, grant a mistrial, or grant a new trial based on the State’s violation of the expert notice statute and rule 16 of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure.
- The cumulative effect of the many claimed errors does not undermine the appellate court’s confidence in the outcome of the verdict.