Utah Code

Utah Code § 76-8-504.6 (2026)

Providing false or misleading information

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this section, "officer of the court" means:
a prosecutor;
a judge;
a court clerk;
an interpreter;
a presentence investigator;
a probation officer;
a parole officer; or
an individual reasonably believed to be gathering information for a criminal proceeding.
Terms defined in Sections 76-1-101.5, 76-8-101, and 76-8-501 apply to this section.
An actor commits providing false or misleading information if the actor, not under oath or affirmation, intentionally or knowingly provides false or misleading material information to:
an officer of the court for the purpose of influencing a criminal proceeding; or
the Bureau of Criminal Identification for the purpose of obtaining a certificate of eligibility for:
expungement; or
removal of the person's name from the White Collar Crime Registry created in Title 77, Chapter 42, Utah White Collar Crime Offender Registry.
Except as provided in Subsection (4), a violation of Subsection (2) is a class B misdemeanor.
This section does not apply under circumstances amounting to Section 76-8-306 or any other provision of this code carrying a greater penalty.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2018–2023 · leading case: Grillone v. Peace Officer Standards, 2023 UT App 35 (Utah Ct. App. 2023).
Grillone v. Peace Officer Standards, 2023 UT App 35 (Utah Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “2 Specifically, in a later-amended notice, POST alleged that six years earlier, in 2014, Grillone—then a police officer with the Murray Police Department—gave false or misleading information (a class B misdemeanor, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-8-504.6 (LexisNexis 2017)) and committed…”
State v. York, 2018 UT App 90 (Utah Ct. App. 2018). “§ 76-8-504.6; providing false information to law enforcement officers, government agencies, or certain specified professionals, id.”
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.