Legal Opinion

State v. Hauptman

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided March 17, 2011No. 20080811-CAPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

DAVIS, Presiding Judge:

T 1 John Callahan Hauptman appeals from his conviction of one count of sexual abuse of a child, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-404.1 (2008). We affirm.

12 Hauptman first argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial. Specifically, he argues that the trial court misapplied the test set forth in McDonough Power Equipment Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548, 104 S.Ct. 845, 78 LEd.2d 663 (1984), to determine whether juror misconduct warranted a new trial. 1 "The McDonough test mandates a new trial if the moving party demonstrates that (1)…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Arizona v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. 438 Main Street v. Easy Heat, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. TemplinUtah Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. MaestasUtah Supreme Court · 2012
  2. State v. BinkerdCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013
  3. State v. Lopez-GonzalezCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2020
  4. State v. MillettCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2012
  5. State v. HunterCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API