State v. Gallegos, 2016 UT App 172

November 2012 parking-lot brawl outside a Salt Lake City club left one man dead (Victim) and a bouncer (Bouncer) stabbed but alive; multiple witnesses described the stabber as a bald Hispanic man.
Gallegos was identified that night as “Smokey from 18th Street” and later linked by police to that moniker; investigators found a warm truck near his apartment and discarded clothing/knife fragments in nearby trash containing Gallegos’s blood.
Manager (a trained bouncer) witnessed both stabbings at close range under club awning lighting, later picked Gallegos from a six-photo array (photo smaller and with different URL) about 30 days after the incident, and identified him at trial.
Five other witnesses also saw one or the other stabbing; several identified Gallegos at trial or from photo arrays; club surveillance and truck descriptions corroborated presence of a Chevy truck matching witness descriptions.
Before trial, Gallegos moved to suppress Manager’s identification; the trial court denied suppression and later admitted Manager’s in-court ID. At trial a police sergeant, despite an agreement not to mention gang ties, made passing references that could suggest gang involvement.
Jury convicted Gallegos of murder, aggravated assault, and obstruction of justice; Gallegos appeals claiming (1) admission of Manager’s identification violated Utah due process and (2) denial of mistrial after gang-related testimony was error.

Issue	Gallegos' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Admissibility of Manager’s eyewitness ID under Utah due process	Photo array and ID were unreliable and suggestive (violating Utah Constitution); Utah’s standard is stricter than federal	Photo array was not so suggestive as to taint reliability; even if flawed, ID was reliable under totality of circumstances and any error was harmless	Court upheld admission under State v. Ramirez totality test; alternatively, any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
Denial of mistrial after sergeant’s gang-related references	Passing references to Metro Gang Unit and “18th Street” were highly prejudicial and breached a pretrial agreement—mistrial required	Remarks were brief, unprompted, de minimis, and did not materially influence verdict amid abundant other evidence	Court found no abuse of discretion; comments were passing and not likely to have denied a fair trial

State v. Ramirez, 817 P.2d 774 (Utah 1991) (establishes Utah totality-of-circumstances gatekeeping test for eyewitness ID)
State v. Long, 721 P.2d 483 (Utah 1986) (sets five-factor framework for assessing eyewitness reliability)
State v. Hubbard, 48 P.3d 953 (Utah 2002) (reaffirms trial court’s gatekeeping role for eyewitness ID)
Perry v. New Hampshire, 132 S. Ct. 716 (U.S. 2012) (federal two-step due process test for suggestive police procedures in ID cases)
Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (U.S. 1972) (federal factors for assessing reliability after suggestive procedures)
Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1967) (harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard for federal constitutional error)
Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673 (U.S. 1986) (factors for assessing prejudice from improper testimony)