Judge reserves whether email was intentionally sent in Koehler v. Allen stalking-injunction hearing

Judge James Brady took under advisement whether a December 2018 message to Alicia Koehler was sent intentionally, after a one-day order-to-show-cause hearing in which the judge found two of three required elements met but said he needed more time on intent. The hearing focused on whether Mark Stewart Allen knowingly violated a stalking injunction issued in May 2016.

The case centers on an email or message the petitioner says she received on Dec. 21, 2018. Alicia Koehler, the petitioner, testified the message arrived in her inbox on that date and that she has repeatedly asked Allen to stop contacting her: "I need him to go away. I need him to leave me alone," she told the court. Koehler asked the court to find Allen in contempt, impose sanctions, and award attorney fees and costs for repeated filings.

The hearing included testimony from Allen, who acknowledged being served with a temporary stalking injunction in May 2016 and said he retained counsel; he told the court he does not recall the specific hearing schedule and said he was told by counsel the case had been dismissed. When shown the Dec. 21, 2018 email (Exhibit C) Allen said he did not recognize it and testified, "There's a possibility I did," but also repeatedly said he did not recall sending the message.

Dr. Jeffrey W. Johnson testified for the defense that he prescribed Allen trazodone 50 milligrams during a phone visit on Dec. 19, 2018 and explained that combining trazodone with an over-the-counter sleep aid such as Unisom can produce marked impairment. "If a person took Unisom and trazodone at the same time, would it impair them?" counsel asked; Dr. Johnson answered, "Yes."

Petitioner counsel focused on the court records and prior proceedings, including a 2017 Provo criminal matter and an earlier transcript (admitted as Exhibit B for limited purpose). Defense counsel emphasized Allen's testimony that he had limited recollection, the contemporaneous medical treatment, and testimony from community members about Allen's character.

In oral findings the judge said he found by clear and convincing evidence that Allen knew what was required by the injunction and that he had the ability to comply, but he was not yet satisfied on the element of intentionality. "I'm going to take the matter under advisement," Judge Brady said, adding he would issue a written decision in the coming weeks.

The judge instructed that if contempt is found and fees are at issue the parties should submit arguments on appropriate amounts. The hearing was adjourned; the court will notify parties in writing of its determination on intent and any sanctions.