Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Court of Appeals weighs lesser‑included instruction, blood-draw warrant language and preservation in Allen appeal
Summary
In State v. Michael Lee Allen, the court heard arguments over whether the trial court erred by denying a lesser-included-offense instruction, whether the statute requires a warrant that authorizes both drawing and testing blood for the chemical-test refusal offense, and whether preservation rules permit post-trial sufficiency challenges by motion to arrest judgment.
The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in State v. Michael Lee Allen on whether the trial court erred by denying a lesser-included-offense instruction, whether a warrant in a refusal-to-submit case must explicitly authorize both the draw and the test of blood, and whether a motion to arrest judgment preserved a sufficiency/preservation argument.
Appellant counsel Wendy Brown argued the denial of a lesser-included instruction was prejudicial and not harmless. Brown emphasized that the state's own witnesses (including an officer’s body-worn camera testimony) left room for the jury to convict of a lesser offense and relied on Baker to explain why a missing lesser-included instruction can materially affect jury decision-making.
Judges challenged…
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
