State v. Griffin
441 P.3d 1166
Utah2015Background
- In 1984 a Texaco night clerk, Bradley Newell Perry, was tied, beaten, stabbed and killed; about $100 was taken. Two students who stopped for gas saw a man with blood on his clothes and received a one-dollar bill with fresh blood.
- A cold case investigation produced mtDNA and DNA testing decades later; a 2005 DNA match tied the blood-stained one-dollar bill to Glenn Howard Griffin. A fellow inmate, Benjamin Britt, also reported Griffin made incriminating statements.
- Griffin was tried, convicted of first-degree murder, sentenced to life without parole, and appealed. He moved under Utah R. App. P. 23 to supplement the record and under Rule 23B to remand for findings on ineffective-assistance claims.
- The Utah Supreme Court denied the Rule 23 motion (procedural/form requirements) but granted Rule 23B relief in part: it remanded to the trial court for factual findings on three specific ineffective-assistance allegations (conflict of interest by a limited-purpose counsel, failure to investigate a witness Steven Wells, and failure to introduce evidence of a burglary conviction of co-suspect Martinez).
- The court stayed Griffin’s direct appeal pending the trial court’s entry of findings (90-day target absent good cause). The court denied remand on numerous other ineffective-assistance allegations as either resolved on the record, speculative, or unsupported.
Issues
| Issue | Griffin's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper vehicle to supplement record: Rule 23 motion | Rule 23 should allow remand to develop missing facts (conflict, compensation, preservation) | Rule 23 governs motion form only; it does not authorize substantive supplementation | Denied — Rule 23 cannot be used to enlarge the record; use Rule 11(h) or 23B when applicable |
| Standard and availability of Rule 23B remand | Remand is needed where the record is inadequate to decide ineffective-assistance claims | 23B is narrow: only nonspeculative factual allegations that, if true, could show ineffective assistance | Described and applied: 23B requires nonspeculative affidavits alleging facts that could satisfy Strickland; remand may be appropriate in those limited cases |
| Counsel conflict of interest (Demler’s prior representation of Archuletta) | Demler previously represented Archuletta who proffered to incriminate Griffin/Maughan; Demler then cross-examined a key witness for Griffin — an actual conflict exists | State argues lack of direct affidavits from Demler or Archuletta undermines claim | Remanded — affidavits from lead counsel and detective were nonspeculative and could, if true, show an actual conflict and prejudice; trial court to make findings |
| Failure to investigate Steven Wells (eyewitness of Martinez with bloody shirt) | Counsel knew of Wells but did not subpoena or investigate him; Wells could supply exculpatory evidence implicating Martinez | State contends evidence is speculative or cumulative | Remanded — allegations non‑speculative as presented by affidavits; failure to investigate this identified witness could be deficient and prejudicial |
| Failure to introduce evidence of Martinez’s burglary of victim’s home | Counsel omitted burglary evidence showing Martinez damaged/stole from victim on day of funeral; this evidence was highly probative of Martinez’s culpability | State notes absence of record reference and argues omission may be trial strategy | Remanded — affidavits establishing the burglary conviction and counsel’s omission were sufficiently nonspeculative; omission could not reasonably be strategic and could be prejudicial |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Templin, 805 P.2d 182 (Utah) (discusses presumption that counsel’s conduct is reasonable and analysis of prejudice)
- Archuleta v. Galetka, 267 P.3d 232 (Utah) (applies Strickland standard and record adequacy on appeal)
- State v. Johnston, 13 P.3d 175 (Utah Ct. App.) (articulated multi‑part approach to evaluating Rule 23B motions)
- Fernandez v. Cook, 870 P.2d 870 (Utah) (addresses counsel strategy and when failure to investigate/call witnesses can be ineffective assistance)