Utah Supreme Court· 7/16/1993

State v. Johnson

Citations

856 P.2d 1064
218 Utah Adv. Rep. 3
1993 Utah LEXIS 100
1993 WL 271451

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

stating evidence that is inadmissible at trial stage, such as hearsay evidence, “may be admissible for sentencing purposes”
applying a correctness standard in reviewing the issue of whether reports con sidered at sentencing were unreliable and violated due process
addressing the appeal of a criminal defendant who sought a declaration of marriage under section 30-1-4.5 in order to qualify for probation under another statute
stating report trial court relied on was inherently unreliable because it consisted of double and triple hearsay and “contained numerous internal inconsistencies and speculative conclusions based on incomplete information and questionable factual assumptions”
“Although hearsay evidence can be admissible in a sentencing proceeding, double hearsay is so inherently unreliable and presents such a high probability for inaccuracy that it cannot stand alone as the basis for sentencing.”
“The burden of proving a negative is nearly impossible to meet.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stewart, Hall, Howe, Durham, Zimmerman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.