Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Court of Appeals hears arguments in State v. Kamara over sufficiency, mistrial and proffered texts
Summary
The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in State v. Kamara on whether evidence was sufficient as to the victim’s age and the number of alleged occurrences, whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek directed‑verdict or unanimity instructions, and whether an in‑court overheard remark requires remand under the presumption‑of‑prejudice framework; the court took the matter under advisement.
Rachel Phillips, counsel for appellant Tracy Kamara, told the Utah Court of Appeals the convictions on Counts 5, 9 and 10 should be reversed for insufficient evidence because the record does not reliably show the victim’s age for one count and does not establish the number of occurrences for the others. Phillips also asserted trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move for directed verdicts and for not seeking unanimity instructions that would have required jurors to agree on the specific acts supporting separate counts.
A three‑judge panel pressed both sides on the record. Judges asked whether the victim’s answers, as elicited at trial, created chronological ambiguity (references to eighth and ninth grade and to multiple episodes) and whether the prosecutor’s demonstrative calendar and the sequencing of questioning would have cured any uncertainty. Phillips argued the testimony lacked limiting qualifiers about…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
