Legal Opinion

State v. Rushton

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 7, 2017No. Case No. 20150737PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Justice Himonas,

opinion of the Court:

INTRODUCTION

¶ 1 This ease clarifies the interpretation of the phrase “single criminal objective” in the context of the mandatory joinder statute, Utah Code § 76-1-401, which prohibits the State from prosecuting a defendant in separate actions for “conduct [that] may establish separate offenses under a single criminal episode,” id. § 76-1-402(2). A “single criminal episode” is defined as “all conduct which is closely related in time and is incident to an attempt or an accomplishment of a single criminal objective.” Id. § 76-1-401 (emphasis added).

¶ 2 The…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Doggett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Reno v. KoraySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. People v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Marion Energy, Inc. v. KFJ Ranch PartnershipUtah Supreme Court · 2011

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. Martinez-CastellanosUtah Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Bryner v. Cardon Outreach, LLCUtah Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Rutherford v. Talisker Canyons Fin., Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2019
  4. Oliver v. Utah Labor Comm'nUtah Supreme Court · 2017
  5. State v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2020

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API