State v. Folsom, 438 P.3d 992

Daniel Jay Folsom was convicted of murder for blunt-force injuries inflicted on his long-term girlfriend (Victim) on December 15, 2011; Victim later died from head injuries.
State evidence: extensive blunt-force trauma to Victim (multiple recent injuries, bleeding in the head), bloodstains and hair throughout the house, Victim’s statements to a neighbor that Folsom was "out of control," and matching DNA on Folsom’s sweatshirt; medical examiner ruled death a homicide.
Folsom’s theory: he acted in self-defense after Victim attacked him; he admitted causing Victim’s injuries but claimed he responded to punches while highly intoxicated.
Pretrial and trial evidentiary disputes: defense sought Victim’s psychiatric/medication records (denied); sought admission of Victim’s out-of-court admissions of prior assaults on Folsom (ruled hearsay/not admissible under rule 804(b)(3)); prosecution introduced evidence and testimony about alleged prior abuse by Folsom and Victim’s past injuries.
Jury was instructed on murder (several variants), manslaughter, and homicide by assault; the court refused to give negligent homicide as a lesser-included offense. Jury convicted Folsom of murder.

Issue	Folsom's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Denial of access to Victim’s psychiatric/med records	Records would show Victim’s violent propensities and support self-defense	Defense request was speculative; no showing records likely contained exculpatory evidence	Court did not err in denying access; even assuming error, no prejudice shown
Exclusion of Victim’s out-of-court admissions of prior assaults (Rule 804(b)(3))	Statements to relatives/coworker were against penal interest and would prove Victim was initial aggressor	Statements lacked necessary indicia of trustworthiness or were not against penal interest	Exclusion affirmed (court found lack of sufficient reliability); any assumed error was harmless
Admission of evidence about Folsom’s alleged prior assaults on Victim / hearsay and character evidence	Such evidence unduly prejudiced and showed propensity in violation of Rule 404	Evidence was admissible rebuttal/character evidence and was largely cumulative	Even assuming erroneous admission, appellate court finds no reasonable likelihood of prejudice given overwhelming physical evidence
Refusal to instruct on negligent homicide as lesser-included offense	There was a rational basis for negligent homicide instruction; failure was harmful	Jury was instructed on manslaughter and convicted of murder; precedent makes any error harmless	Court need not reach merit because conviction stands; if remand occurred, court requested negligent homicide be given on retrial

State v. Reece, 349 P.3d 712 (Utah 2015) (defendant bears burden to show error affected outcome)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel — prejudice and deficient performance)
State v. Daniels, 40 P.3d 611 (Utah 2002) (failure to give lesser-included instruction harmless where jury convicted of greater offense despite instruction on an intermediate lesser)
State v. Garcia, 424 P.3d 171 (Utah 2018) (State must disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt; defendant bears burden under Strickland for prejudice)
State v. Knight, 734 P.2d 913 (Utah 1987) (harmless error and standard for undermining confidence in verdict)
State v. Berriel, 299 P.3d 1133 (Utah 2013) (deadly force justified only when absolutely required; necessary force standard)