Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Utah courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Petersgreen2 sentences2007"Where the defendant has touched a body part specified in the statute, the court inquires into the surrounding factual background only as it may be relevant to other elements of and defenses to the crime." State v. Peters, 796 P.2d 708, 711 (Utah Ct.App.1990) (discussing also that the "inquiry into all the facts surrounding the event in question [in an indecent liberties analysis] contrasts with the simple inquiry suggested by a proscription against touching a specified body part"). ' 19 Recently, in State v. Jacobs, 2006 UT App 356 , 144 P.3d 226 , this court was called upon to interpret the 2006See id. at 711-12 (noting that the forcible sexual abuse statute does not specify whether the touching must be of unclothed body parts, and then proceeding to evaluate the surrounding circumstances to determine that the touching of a clothed breast constituted taking indecent liberties). ¶ 10 But here, the indecent liberties analysis was irrelevant because the State focused only on the touching prong at trial. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Jacobs
green
2 sentences2018Although Carvajal does not contend that the indecent liberties instruction itself was incorrect, we note that the language of this jury instruction appears to be an adaptation of the language provided in State v. Jacobs , 2006 UT App. 356 , ¶ 9, 144 P.3d 226 ("Thus, even when the specified body parts are touched through clothing, the perpetrator may still be punished under the indecent liberties prong of the statute when, considering all the surrounding circumstances, the conduct is comparable to the touching that is specifically prohibited."). 2018Although Carvajal does not contend that the indecent liberties instruction itself was incorrect, we note that the language of this jury instruction appears to be an adaptation of the language provided in State v. Jacobs , 2006 UT App. 356 , ¶ 9, 144 P.3d 226 ("Thus, even when the specified body parts are touched through clothing, the perpetrator may still be punished under the indecent liberties prong of the statute when, considering all the surrounding circumstances, the conduct is comparable to the touching that is specifically prohibited."). | 2 | 2007–2018 |
State v. McDaniel
green
1 sentence2025Thus, even considering these assumed errors together, our confidence in this verdict is not undermined. 20230525-CA 38 2025 UT App 120 | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Menzies
green
1 sentence1994Id. at 482 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.