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.
11 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2021 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. Balesgreen2 sentences2021See State v. Franklin, 735 P.2d 34, 39 (Utah 1987) (“[W]hen there is ample evidence to justify a flight instruction, it is not error to give one so long as it instructs the jury that there might be reasons for flight that are fully consistent with innocence of the crime charged and that even if consciousness of guilt is inferred from flight, it does not necessarily reflect actual guilt.”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Robertson, 2017 UT 27 , 438 P.3d 491 ; accord State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 573, 575 (Utah 1983); see also State v. 20190399-CA 23 2021 UT App 85 State v. Sundara Fairclough 2008The weight to which this circumstance is entitled is a matter for you to decide. ¶65 This flight instruction is similar to the flight instruction at issue in State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 573, 574 (Utah 1983). | 4 | 6 |
State v. Franklingreen2 sentences2021See State v. Franklin, 735 P.2d 34, 39 (Utah 1987) (“[W]hen there is ample evidence to justify a flight instruction, it is not error to give one so long as it instructs the jury that there might be reasons for flight that are fully consistent with innocence of the crime charged and that even if consciousness of guilt is inferred from flight, it does not necessarily reflect actual guilt.”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Robertson, 2017 UT 27 , 438 P.3d 491 ; accord State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 573, 575 (Utah 1983); see also State v. 20190399-CA 23 2021 UT App 85 State v. Sundara Fairclough 2014And Utah law requires juries to be advised of that possibility: ‚*I+t is not error to give *a flight instruction+ so long as it instructs the jury that there might be reasons for flight that are fully consistent with innocence of the crime charged and that even if consciousness of guilt is inferred from flight, it does not necessarily reflect actual guilt.‛ State v. Franklin, 735 P.2d 34, 39 (Utah 1987). | 4 | 4 |
State v. Sundaragreen2 sentences2021The Flight Instruction ¶55 Lastly, Sundara presents a bifurcated argument that the flight instruction given by the court was improper. ¶56 Sundara first contends that the flight instruction was improper under existing law because the only evidence of flight—Friend’s testimony that the men ran after the stabbing— was direct, making the flight instruction “confusing and unnecessary.” Put another way, Sundara argues that the flight instruction was improper because 20190399-CA 21 2021 UT App 85 State v. Sundara [t]he jury did not need an instruction about how to draw inferences from this direct ev 2021The lower court gave a flight instruction, but this court determined that the flight instruction was erroneous because “no flight occurred after commission of the crime charged.” Id. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Faircloughgreen1 sentence2021See State v. Franklin, 735 P.2d 34, 39 (Utah 1987) (“[W]hen there is ample evidence to justify a flight instruction, it is not error to give one so long as it instructs the jury that there might be reasons for flight that are fully consistent with innocence of the crime charged and that even if consciousness of guilt is inferred from flight, it does not necessarily reflect actual guilt.”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Robertson, 2017 UT 27 , 438 P.3d 491 ; accord State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 573, 575 (Utah 1983); see also State v. 20190399-CA 23 2021 UT App 85 State v. Sundara Fairclough | 1 | 1 |
State v. Robertsongreen2 sentences2021See State v. Franklin, 735 P.2d 34, 39 (Utah 1987) (“[W]hen there is ample evidence to justify a flight instruction, it is not error to give one so long as it instructs the jury that there might be reasons for flight that are fully consistent with innocence of the crime charged and that even if consciousness of guilt is inferred from flight, it does not necessarily reflect actual guilt.”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Robertson, 2017 UT 27 , 438 P.3d 491 ; accord State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 573, 575 (Utah 1983); see also State v. 20190399-CA 23 2021 UT App 85 State v. Sundara Fairclough 2021See State v. Franklin, 735 P.2d 34, 39 (Utah 1987) (“[W]hen there is ample evidence to justify a flight instruction, it is not error to give one so long as it instructs the jury that there might be reasons for flight that are fully consistent with innocence of the crime charged and that even if consciousness of guilt is inferred from flight, it does not necessarily reflect actual guilt.”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Robertson, 2017 UT 27 , 438 P.3d 491 ; accord State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 573, 575 (Utah 1983); see also State v. 20190399-CA 23 2021 UT App 85 State v. Sundara Fairclough | 1 | 1 |
People v. Lokergreen2 sentences2014The California Supreme Court, considering the admissibility of a defendant's flight several days after committing murder, has also found such flight to be probative: "Com-suggests that a guilty person does not lose the desire to avoid apprehension for [grave] offenses ... after only a few days." People v. Loker, 44 Cal.4th 691 , 80 Cal.Rptr.3d 630 , 188 P.3d 580, 595 (2008) (first omission in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 128 Thus, a flight instruction is appropriate if the cireumstances could support a reasonable inference that the defendant is fleeing out of a co 2014The California Supreme Court, 20120513-CA 16 2014 UT App 256 State v. LoPrinzi considering the admissibility of a defendant’s flight several days after committing murder, has also found such flight to be probative: ‚Common sense . . . suggests that a guilty person does not lose the desire to avoid apprehension for [grave] offenses . . . after only a few days.‛ People v. Loker, 188 P.3d 580, 595 (Cal. 2008) (first omission in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). ¶28 Thus, a flight instruction is appropriate if the circumstances could support a reasonable inference that the | 1 | 1 |
People v. Bonillagreen2 sentences2014Sudden, permanent departure following police questioning can be probative of a consciousness of guilt 9 See State v. Hunter, 136 Ariz. 45 , 664 P.2d 195, 198 (1983) (in bane) ("If the manner of leaving the scene suggests consciousness of guilt then a flight instruction is proper."); People v. Bonilla, 41 Cal.4th 313 , 60 Cal.Rptr.3d 209 , 160 P.3d 84, 89 (2007) (explaining that a flight instruction is proper where the cireum-stances indicate that the person fled to avoid arrest). 2014She simply contends that the instruction should not have been given, however correctly it stated the law. 20120513-CA 17 2014 UT App 256 State v. LoPrinzi proper.‛); People v. Bonilla, 160 P.3d 84, 89 (Cal. 2007) (explaining that a flight instruction is proper where the circumstances indicate that the person fled to avoid arrest). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Huntergreen2 sentences2014Sudden, permanent departure following police questioning can be probative of a consciousness of guilt 9 See State v. Hunter, 136 Ariz. 45 , 664 P.2d 195, 198 (1983) (in bane) ("If the manner of leaving the scene suggests consciousness of guilt then a flight instruction is proper."); People v. Bonilla, 41 Cal.4th 313 , 60 Cal.Rptr.3d 209 , 160 P.3d 84, 89 (2007) (explaining that a flight instruction is proper where the cireum-stances indicate that the person fled to avoid arrest). 2014Sudden, permanent departure following police questioning can be probative of a consciousness of guilt.9 See State v. Hunter, 664 P.2d 195, 198 (Ariz. 1983) (in banc) (‚If the manner of leaving the scene suggests consciousness of guilt then a flight instruction is 9. | 1 | 1 |
State v. DeAlogreen1 sentence2006Because the allegedly erroneous instruction here was "superfluous and not the basis of the jury’s verdict” against Defendant, State v. DeAlo, 748 P.2d 194, 198 (Utah Ct.App.1987), Defendant cannot demonstrate prejudice arising from this alleged error. 4 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Howlandgreen2 sentences1999See State v. Howland, 761 P.2d 579, 580 (Utah Ct.App.1988). ¶ 12 In Howland , the defendant was charged with aggravated assault and the jury was given a flight instruction. 1999See State v. Howland, 761 P.2d 579, 580 (Utah Ct.App.1988). ¶ 12 In Howland , the defendant was charged with aggravated assault and the jury was given a flight instruction. | 1 | 1 |
Miranda v. Arizonagreen2 sentences1999See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). 1999See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gibsongreen1 sentence1999See State v. Gibson, 908 P.2d 352, 354 (Utah Ct.App.1995), cert. denied, 917 P.2d 556 (Utah 1996). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Knightgreen1 sentence1988See State v. Knight, 734 P.2d 913, 919 (Utah 1987); see also Utah Code Ann. § 77-35-30 (1982). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Grantgreen2 sentences1983State v. Grant, 275 S.C. 404, 407 , 272 S.E.2d 169, 171 (1980). 1983State v. Grant, 275 S.C. 404, 407 , 272 S.E.2d 169, 171 (1980). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Braffordgreen1 sentence1983An instruction similar to the first paragraph quoted above was approved in State v. Gonzales, 30 Utah 2d 302 , 517 P.2d 547 (1973), but an instruction containing both of the above paragraphs has not come before us until State v. Brafford, Utah, 663 P.2d 68, 70 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. William A. Bordersgreen1 sentence1983United States v. Borders, 693 F.2d 1318, 1327-28 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 1875 , 76 L.Ed.2d 807 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
cluster 284849green1 sentence1983Bailey v. United States, 410 F.2d 1209, 1217 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, sub nom. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. LoPrinzi
green
2 sentences2021“We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.” State v. LoPrinzi, 2014 UT App 256, ¶ 10 , 338 P.3d 253 (quotation simplified).6 ANALYSIS I. 2021“We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.” State v. LoPrinzi, 2014 UT App 256, ¶ 10 , 338 P.3d 253 (quotation simplified).6 ANALYSIS I. | 3 | 2014–2021 |
State v. Granados
green
2 sentences2021Cf. State v. Granados, 2019 UT App 158, ¶ 39 , 451 P.3d 289 (explaining, in the context of discussing how to handle sleeping jurors, that “district courts have considerable discretion in determining how best to resolve the issue”). ¶35 Fourth, Sundara asserts that the trial court erred in giving the flight instruction. 2021Cf. State v. Granados, 2019 UT App 158, ¶ 39 , 451 P.3d 289 (explaining, in the context of discussing how to handle sleeping jurors, that “district courts have considerable discretion in determining how best to resolve the issue”). ¶35 Fourth, Sundara asserts that the trial court erred in giving the flight instruction. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Escobar-Florez
green
2 sentences2019This court will grant a rule 23B motion to remand “only upon a nonspeculative allegation of facts, not fully appearing in the record on appeal, which, if true, could support a determination that counsel was ineffective.” Id. ¶24 Escobar-Florez next contends that the district court erred in issuing a flight instruction to the jury. 2019In fact, trial counsel offered alternative explanations for Escobar-Florez’s alleged flight, including that he was “in this country illegally.” 20170390-CA 24 2019 UT App 135 State v. Escobar-Florez “after the commission of the crime charged.” Id. ¶ 25 (emphasis added) (cleaned up). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Riggs
green
2 sentences2014State v. Berriel, 2013 UT 19, ¶ 8 , 299 P.3d 1133 (noting that the precise amount of deference afforded on review depends on the type of issue presented). ‚We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.‛ State v. Riggs, 1999 UT App 271, ¶ 7 , 987 P.2d 1281 , abrogated on other grounds by State v. Levin, 2006 UT 50 , 144 P.3d 1095 .5 ¶11 Finally, LoPrinzi asserts that the court improperly denied her motion for a new trial because the jury’s verdicts on the charges against her were inconsistent. 2014State v. Berriel, 2013 UT 19, ¶ 8 , 299 P.3d 1133 (noting that the precise amount of deference afforded on review depends on the type of issue presented). ‚We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.‛ State v. Riggs, 1999 UT App 271, ¶ 7 , 987 P.2d 1281 , abrogated on other grounds by State v. Levin, 2006 UT 50 , 144 P.3d 1095 .5 ¶11 Finally, LoPrinzi asserts that the court improperly denied her motion for a new trial because the jury’s verdicts on the charges against her were inconsistent. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Levin
green
2 sentences2014State v. Berriel, 2013 UT 19, ¶ 8 , 299 P.3d 1133 (noting that the precise amount of deference afforded on review depends on the type of issue presented). ‚We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.‛ State v. Riggs, 1999 UT App 271, ¶ 7 , 987 P.2d 1281 , abrogated on other grounds by State v. Levin, 2006 UT 50 , 144 P.3d 1095 .5 ¶11 Finally, LoPrinzi asserts that the court improperly denied her motion for a new trial because the jury’s verdicts on the charges against her were inconsistent. 2014We therefore cite the standard of review set forth in State v. Riggs, 1999 UT App 271 , 987 P.2d 1281 , abrogated on other grounds by State v. Levin, 2006 UT 50 , 144 P.3d 1095 , which involves the giving of a flight instruction and therefore is directly on point. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Berriel
green
2 sentences2014State v. Berriel, 2013 UT 19, ¶ 8 , 299 P.3d 1133 (noting that the precise amount of deference afforded on review depends on the type of issue presented). ‚We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.‛ State v. Riggs, 1999 UT App 271, ¶ 7 , 987 P.2d 1281 , abrogated on other grounds by State v. Levin, 2006 UT 50 , 144 P.3d 1095 .5 ¶11 Finally, LoPrinzi asserts that the court improperly denied her motion for a new trial because the jury’s verdicts on the charges against her were inconsistent. 2014State v. Berriel, 2013 UT 19, ¶ 8 , 299 P.3d 1133 (noting that the precise amount of deference afforded on review depends on the type of issue presented). ‚We review the trial court’s decision to give a flight instruction for correctness.‛ State v. Riggs, 1999 UT App 271, ¶ 7 , 987 P.2d 1281 , abrogated on other grounds by State v. Levin, 2006 UT 50 , 144 P.3d 1095 .5 ¶11 Finally, LoPrinzi asserts that the court improperly denied her motion for a new trial because the jury’s verdicts on the charges against her were inconsistent. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Pacheco
green
1 sentence1999Additionally, the instructions must “bear a relationship to evidence reflected in the record.” Pacheco, 495 P.2d at 808 . ¶ 10 The jury in the present case received the following flight instruction: The flight or attempted flight of a person immediately after the commission of a crime or after that person is accused of a crime that has been committed, is not sufficient in itself to establish the defendant’s guilt. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Gonzales
neutral
2 sentences1983An instruction similar to the first paragraph quoted above was approved in State v. Gonzales, 30 Utah 2d 302 , 517 P.2d 547 (1973), but an instruction containing both of the above paragraphs has not come before us until State v. Brafford, Utah, 663 P.2d 68, 70 (1983). 1983An instruction similar to the first paragraph quoted above was approved in State v. Gonzales, 30 Utah 2d 302 , 517 P.2d 547 (1973), but an instruction containing both of the above paragraphs has not come before us until State v. Brafford, Utah, 663 P.2d 68, 70 (1983). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Humphries v. South Carolina
green
1 sentence1983United States v. Borders, 693 F.2d 1318, 1327-28 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 1875 , 76 L.Ed.2d 807 (1983). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Borkowski v. Borkowski
green
1 sentence1983United States v. Borders, 693 F.2d 1318, 1327-28 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 1875 , 76 L.Ed.2d 807 (1983). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
State v. Robison
neutral
2 sentences1983We approved a flight instruction in State v. Robison, 28 Utah 2d 90 , 498 P.2d 658 (1972), but the instruction was not quoted in that opinion. 1983We approved a flight instruction in State v. Robison, 28 Utah 2d 90 , 498 P.2d 658 (1972), but the instruction was not quoted in that opinion. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.