State v. Boyer
2020 UT App 23
| Utah Ct. App. | 2020Background
- In 2013 a now-14-year-old victim reported historical sexual abuse by Mark Boyer; police interviewed her at the Children’s Justice Center and she provided a prewritten statement. Boyer was charged with multiple counts of aggravated sexual abuse, rape of a child, and sodomy on a child.
- First trial ended in mistrial after the victim made an impeaching reference to another alleged victim; second trial proceeded, the jury convicted Boyer on all counts, and the court imposed consecutive 15-years-to-life terms on two counts.
- Defense pursued a theory that the victim had been indoctrinated by Boyer’s ex-wife; defense obtained a stipulation and read into evidence an uncharged “sleepover” incident but was denied admission of other prior alleged incidents under Utah R. Evid. 412.
- The State’s psychiatrist expert testified about common behavioral patterns of child sexual-abuse victims (delayed/inconsistent disclosure); the district court allowed the testimony after voir dire.
- The court conducted an in camera review of certain victim medical/mental-health records, found no exculpatory material, and shredded them; post-conviction appellate counsel sought subpoenas and reconstruction of the record.
- Appellant moved for a new trial (raising cumulative ineffective-assistance, evidentiary errors, and prosecutorial misconduct), moved to disqualify the trial judge for bias, and moved to reconstruct the record; the district court denied relief and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Boyer) | Defendant's Argument (State/District Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) New trial based on cumulative error / ineffective assistance | Numerous instances of deficient trial counsel (failure to investigate/introduce other-allegation evidence; poor impeachment; failure to exclude expert; failure to secure records) and other errors cumulatively denied a fair trial | Any individual alleged errors were either meritless, strategic, harmless, or concerned evidence that would have been inadmissible; no prejudice shown | Court affirmed: appellant failed Strickland showing and failed to show cumulative errors undermined confidence in verdict. |
| 2) Admissibility of victim’s other-allegation evidence (Utah R. Evid. 412 & prior-false-allegation doctrine) | Office-incident and cousin allegations were admissible (412(b)(3) or as evidence of false prior accusations); State withheld a letter and defense counsel failed to investigate | The other-allegation evidence was either barred by Rule 412 or not shown to be false by preponderance; admission would not have been essential to defense | Court held the evidence was inadmissible or not provably false; so failures re: it caused no prejudice. |
| 3) Psychiatrist expert testimony | Expert lacked sufficient foundation and impermissibly bolstered the victim’s credibility | Expert relied on extensive clinical experience; testimony described general symptoms consistent with abuse and avoided opining on truthfulness | Court affirmed: testimony met Rule 702 threshold and did not improperly testify to victim’s veracity; counsel’s failure to obtain a motion in limine was not deficient. |
| 4) Disqualification / recusal of trial judge | Sentencing comments expressing belief in victim and criticizing defendant showed actual and apparent bias and required recusal from post-trial motions | Judge’s remarks grew from evidence presented and sentencing duties; judicial comments during proceedings are not ordinarily grounds for disqualification absent extrajudicial bias or unacceptable appearance to a reasonable person | Court held no actual or legally cognizable appearance of bias; review judge properly denied disqualification. |
| 5) Reconstruction / production of victim’s mental-health and medical records | Trial counsel should have subpoenaed records pretrial; post-trial subpoenas and reconstruction should be ordered because records might contain exculpatory material (Utah R. Evid. 506(d)(1)) | Privilege presumptively protects records; defendant failed to meet the stringent Blake standard to show the records would likely contain material exculpatory evidence relevant to an element or defense | Court held appellant was not entitled to in camera review or production under Rule 506(d)(1); denial of reconstruction/subpoena caused no reversible prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994) (judicial remarks during proceedings ordinarily do not establish bias requiring recusal)
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009) (recusal required where probability of actual bias is constitutionally intolerable)
- State v. Thornton, 391 P.3d 1016 (Utah 2017) (Rule 412 exceptions and high bar to admit other sexual-behavior evidence when exclusion would impinge constitutional rights)
- State v. Tarrats, 122 P.3d 581 (Utah 2005) (prior sexual allegations admissible only if shown false by preponderance)
- State v. Blake, 63 P.3d 56 (Utah 2002) (stringent test for overcoming psychotherapist-patient privilege under Rule 506(d)(1))
- State v. Maestas, 299 P.3d 892 (Utah 2012) (abuse-of-discretion standard for admission of expert testimony)
- State v. Ramsey, 782 P.2d 480 (Utah 1989) (expert may not opine on a witness’s truthfulness)