Utah Code » Title 77, Chapter 22 — Subpoena Powers for Aid of Criminal Investigation and Grants of Immunity
Utah Code

Utah Code § 77-22-1 (2026)

Declaration of necessity

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

It is declared, as a matter of legislative determination, that it is necessary to grant subpoena powers in aid of criminal investigations and to provide a method of keeping information gained from investigations secret both to protect the innocent and to prevent criminal suspects from having access to information prior to prosecution.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Gutierrez v. Medley, 972 P.2d 913 (Utah 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gutierrez v. Medley, 972 P.2d 913 (Utah 1998). · cites it 13× “On August 15, 1997, one year after charges had been brought and one week before the scheduled trial, the district court issued an order, pursuant to Utah Code Ann. §§ 77-22-1 to -5 (the "Subpoena Powers Act"), permitting the State to subpoena Cindy and Melissa Gutierrez to…”
In re Crim. Investigation, 7th Dist. Court No. CS-1, 754 P.2d 633 (Utah 1988). · cites it 8× “Utah Code Ann. §§ 77-22-1 to -3 (1982). The Act creates a second method for formally investigating criminal activities in addition to the already authorized state grand jury.”
Parsons v. Barnes, 871 P.2d 516 (Utah 1994). · cites it 4× “" Utah Code Ann. § 77-22-1 . For this reason, the statute does not require the prosecutor to give notice of the proceedings to persons being investigated, nor does it require such persons and their counsel to be present during the proceedings.”
State v. Thompson, 810 P.2d 415 (Utah 1991). · cites it 4× “ARGUMENT Defendants assail the trial court's denial of their motion to suppress all evidence gathered by the State under the Subpoena Powers Act, Utah Code Ann. §§ 77-22-1 through -3, contending that their right to be secure in their papers against unreasonable searches and…”
Burns v. Boyden, 2006 UT 14 (Utah 2006). · cites it 2× “The complaint was subsequently referred to the Attorney General’s Office, Department of Insurance, Fraud Division, which submitted an application to the district court for an order to open a formal investigation pursuant to the Subpoena Powers for Aid of Criminal Investigation…”
State v. Fletcher, 751 P.2d 822 (Utah Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “1988), this Court disposed of defendant's first two issues on appeal, namely 1) the admissibility of evidence obtained pursuant to Utah Code Ann. §§ 77-22-1 through -3 (1982), and 2) the sufficiency of the evidence to allow multiple counts of bribery to go to the jury.”
State v. Thompson, 751 P.2d 805 (Utah Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “The instant case began with a secret investigation conducted in Emery County under the authority of Judge Boyd Bunnell, Seventh District Court, and pursuant to Utah Code Annotated §§ 77-22-1 through -3 (1982), commonly referred to as the Subpoena Powers Act or the Utah…”
Kearns-Tribune Corp. v. Wilkinson, 946 P.2d 372 (Utah 1997). “Wilkinson, respondent, to (i) vacate his decision rendered on June 10, 1997, and entered on July 14, 1997, finding that Kearns-Tribune lacked standing to claim access to documents filed by the district attorney requesting a secrecy order under the Investigative Subpoena Powers…”
United States v. Sheets, 125 F.R.D. 172 (D. Utah 1989). “Defendant claims an “expectancy of privacy" based on the Utah Subpoena Powers Act § 77-22-1, etc., Utah Code Ann. The Act has no application.”
State v. Yount, 2008 UT App 102 (Utah Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “The Subpoena Powers Act, see Utah Code Ann. § 77-22-1 to -5 (2003), was enacted "to grant subpoena powers in [the] aid of eriminal investigations and to provide a method of keeping information gained from investigations secret," id.”
State v. Andrus, 2025 UT 15 (Utah 2025). · cites it 4× “¶3 Andrus also asserts that the State’s evidence was insufficient to convict him on several counts. We vacate Andrus’s __________________________________________________________ 1 UTAH CODE §§ 77-23c-101.”
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.