Brixen & Christopher Architects, P.C. v. State
Court of Appeals of Utah
1DissentDavis, Judge
52 I respectfully dissent. I would affirm the trial court's grant of Brixen's petition to quash the CID because I consider section 76-10-917, to the extent information obtained thereunder may be used in a criminal proceeding, to be unconstitutional, This is an appropriate case for this court to exercise its ability to affirm on any ground. See Dipoma v. McPhie, 2000 UT App 130, ¶ 4, 1 P.3d 564 (stating "[tlhis court may affirm a lower court's ruling on any alternative ground even though that ground or theory was not identified by the lower court as the basis of its ruling" (quotations and…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Church of Scientology of California v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Abel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Braswell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Federal Trade Commission v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.