State v. Cruz, 478 P.3d 631

Cruz and the victim dated; after Cruz’s release from prison the victim tried to end the relationship and hid at a friend’s apartment.
Cruz broke into the apartment late at night, pointed a loaded gun at the victim, threatened to "blast" the apartment, and demanded she leave with him.
The victim left; Cruz then forced her into his car, struck her, demanded sex, and took her to a basement in Ogden; police later located them and arrested Cruz.
The victim first told police she left because she was fearful and wanted a no-contact order; at trial she recanted and testified she left willingly and no gun was involved.
The State impeached the victim with two audio recordings of her earlier statements and evidence she had been threatened and contacted by Cruz about her testimony; a jury convicted Cruz of aggravated kidnapping.
On appeal Cruz claimed (1) ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to move for a directed verdict and for not objecting to one audio recording as false evidence, and (2) sentencing error because the district court failed to resolve his PSI objections on the record.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving for a directed verdict on aggravated kidnapping	Cruz: evidence insufficient to show intent to detain or restrain; counsel should have moved for directed verdict	State: evidence (break-in, gun threats, assault in car, taking to basement, victim’s prior fear) provided some evidence of intent; motion would have been futile	Court: counsel not deficient; sufficient evidence supported jury to infer attempt to detain/ restrain
Whether counsel was ineffective for not objecting to an audio recording the State played as false evidence	Cruz: recording falsely implied victim requested the no-contact order; State knew it had sought the order, so evidence was false and material to credibility	State: even if problematic, a second recording and other independent evidence showed the victim wanted a no-contact order and the gun/threat evidence was already strong	Court: counsel not ineffective; any error was not prejudicial—recordings were cumulative and conviction would likely stand
Whether the district court erred by failing to resolve PSI objections on the record at sentencing	Cruz: no oral findings; written judgment merely summarized objections without resolving accuracy	State: concedes error and requests limited remand	Court: limited remand ordered for the district court to make specific findings regarding Cruz’s PSI objections

State v. Ray, 469 P.3d 871 (Utah 2020) (articulates ineffective-assistance standard)
State v. Baer, 438 P.3d 979 (Utah Ct. App. 2019) (declining futile directed-verdict motions is not deficient)
State v. Fowers, 309 P.3d 1156 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (requiring a substantial step corroborating intent to detain for attempted kidnapping)
State v. Wright, 442 P.3d 1185 (Utah Ct. App. 2019) (distinguishing assaultive acts from restrictive acts insufficient to show intent to detain)
State v. Schnoor, 845 P.2d 947 (Utah Ct. App. 1993) (prohibition on state knowingly using false evidence)
State v. Gordon, 886 P.2d 112 (Utah Ct. App. 1994) (false or false-appearing testimony may be harmless when independent evidence supports the verdict)