Utah Code

Utah Code § 76-2-401 (2026)

Justification as defense -- When allowed

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Conduct which is justified is a defense to prosecution for any offense based on the conduct. The defense of justification may be claimed:

when the actor's conduct is in defense of persons or property under the circumstances described in Sections 76-2-402 through 76-2-406 of this part;

when the actor's conduct is reasonable and in fulfillment of his duties as a governmental officer or employee;

when the actor's conduct is reasonable discipline of minors by parents, guardians, teachers, or other persons in loco parentis, as limited by Subsection (2);

when the actor's conduct is reasonable discipline of persons in custody under the laws of the state; or

when the actor's conduct is justified for any other reason under the laws of this state.

The defense of justification under Subsection (1)(c) is not available if the offense charged involves causing serious bodily injury, as defined in Section 76-1-101.5, serious injury, as defined in Section 76-5-109, or the death of the minor.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 18 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2021 · leading case: Bountiful City v. Baize, 2021 UT 9 (Utah 2021).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bountiful City v. Baize, 2021 UT 9 (Utah 2021). · cites it 27× “emained within the confines of the law “[i]f he was being extra cautious” and “spanked him much more lightly to the point where there was no 6 Utah Code section 76-5-109(8) provides: A person is not guilty of an offense under this section for conduct that constitutes: (a)…”

State v. Alonzo, 932 P.2d 606 (Utah Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “Defendants argue the trial court erred in refusing to give their proposed jury instructions, which referred specifically to "self-defense" and which were "prepared directly" from Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-2-401 and -402 *616 (1995).”

State v. Gardiner, 814 P.2d 568 (Utah 1991). · cites it 4× “We consider the enactment of these specific and varied defenses and the failure to enact any general illegality defense to impliedly preclude us from finding any generally available common law right to resist an illegal search or arrest.”

Bountiful City v. Baize, 2019 UT App 24 (Utah Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 14× “Because the statutory provisions in effect at the relevant time do not differ in any material way from those now in effect, we cite the current version of the Utah Code.”

State v. Miller, 2008 UT 61 (Utah 2008). · cites it 2× “" Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-401 (1)(e). This is a broad catchall provision that allows courts to ensure that justice is done.”

State v. Sanders, 2019 UT 25 (Utah 2019). · cites it 2× “§§ 76-2-401 to -407. Under section 76-10-503(1)(b), any person who has been convicted of any felony, or meets another specified criteria, is a Category II restricted person.”

Salt Lake City v. Smoot, 921 P.2d 1003 (Utah Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “at 574 (citing Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-2-401 to —406 (1990)).”

K.Y. v. Div. of Child & Fam. Servs., 2010 UT App 335 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “" See Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-401 (c) (2008); Utah Code Ann.”

In re C.M.R..., 2020 UT App 114 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 76-2-401(2) (stating that the defense of justifiable conduct involving reasonable discipline of a minor “is not available if the offense charged involves causing .”

Commonwealth v. Dorvil, 32 N.E.3d 861 (Mass. 2015). “§ 627:6 (excluding “the malicious or reckless use of force that creates a risk of death, serious bodily injury, or substantial pain”); Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-401 (prohibiting parental privilege defense “if the offense charged involves causing serious bodily injury, .”

State Ex Rel. L.P., 981 P.2d 848 (Utah Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 5× “Such factual findings may include, but are not limited to, the following: whether the acts complained of were in reasonable discipline of a minor by a parent or one in loco parentis, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-401 (3) (1995); evidence of any bruises, contusions, or abrasions on…”

State v. Knoll, 712 P.2d 211 (Utah 1985). “” § 76-2-401; see § 76-2-402. Furthermore, appellant’s argument would force the prosecution to prove a negative in a homicide offense, a burden the law does not often impose.”

Show all 18 citing cases →

— Utah Code § 76-2-401(1) — 2 cases

Bountiful City v. Baize, 2019 UT App 24 (Utah Ct. App. 2019). “Because the statutory provisions in effect at the relevant time do not differ in any material way from those now in effect, we cite the current version of the Utah Code.”

State v. Martinez, 2013 UT App 154 (Utah Ct. App. 2013).

— Utah Code § 76-2-401(1)(a) — 2 cases

Ray v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2015 UT 83 (Utah 2015).

Ray v. Wal-Mart, 2015 UT 83 (Utah 2015).

— Utah Code § 76-2-401(1)(c) — 2 cases

Bountiful City v. Baize, 2021 UT 9 (Utah 2021). “emained within the confines of the law “[i]f he was being extra cautious” and “spanked him much more lightly to the point where there was no 6 Utah Code section 76-5-109(8) provides: A person is not guilty of an offense under this section for conduct that constitutes: (a)…”

— Utah Code § 76-2-401(2) — 3 cases

— Utah Code § 76-2-401(3) — 3 cases

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Clyde, 920 P.2d 1183 (Utah 1996).

State Ex Rel. L.P., 981 P.2d 848 (Utah Ct. App. 1999). “Such factual findings may include, but are not limited to, the following: whether the acts complained of were in reasonable discipline of a minor by a parent or one in loco parentis, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-401 (3) (1995); evidence of any bruises, contusions, or abrasions on…”

State Ex Rel. Lp, 1999 UT App 157 (Utah Ct. App. 1999).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.