State v. Hernandez
2011 UT 70
| Utah | 2011Background
- Hernandez was charged on November 30, 2007 with four Class A misdemeanors: negligent homicide, obstruction of justice, unlawful sale/supply of alcohol to minors, and possession of drug paraphernalia.
- On June 6, 2008 Hernandez requested a preliminary hearing, arguing article I, section 13 entitles such a hearing for Class A misdemeanors; the district court initially granted but then denied after reconsideration.
- The district court held the offenses did not exist or were not indictable under Utah territorial law, and thus did not trigger article I, section 18 protections.
- The Court of Appeals certified the interlocutory appeal to the Utah Supreme Court, which accepted jurisdiction under Utah Code section 78A-3-102(8)(b) (Supp. 2010).
- The court ultimately held that article I, section 13 applies to offenses indictable under Utah territorial law, including Class A misdemeanors, and that “examination and commitment” requires a preliminary hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does article I, section 13 apply to Class A misdemeanors? | Hernandez argues ‘offenses heretofore’ includes indictable misdemeanors. | State contends the phrase refers to felonies or grand jury indictments under the federal Constitution, not Class A misdemeanors. | Yes; article I, section 13 applies to Class A misdemeanors. |
| What constitutes an 'indictable offense' under article I, section 18 as to territorial law? | Indictable offenses include those historically indictable under Utah Territory, based on punishment, not a current list. | Indictable offenses are limited to offenses indictable under the federal system or a narrow historical list. | Indictable offenses include Class A misdemeanors punishable > six months; territorial punishment alone determines indictability. |
| Does 'examination and commitment' require a preliminary hearing? | Examination and commitment refers to a meaningful evidentiary hearing. | Examination could be satisfied by magistrate review of an affidavit or information. | Examination and commitment means a preliminary hearing with witness examination and evidence. |
| What is the procedural consequence for Hernandez’s case? | Class A misdemeanors must receive a preliminary hearing under Article I, section 13. | Not applicable since the district court denied the hearing. | District court erred; Hernandez is entitled to a preliminary hearing; case remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Am. Bush v. City of S. Salt Lake, 2006 UT 40 (Utah) (construes text with historical intent and territorial context)
- State v. Nelson, 52 Utah 617, 176 P. 860 (Utah) (interprets article I, section 18 as applying to indictable offenses)
- State v. Johnson, 100 Utah 316, 114 P.2d 1034 (Utah) (notes article I, section 13 concerns felonies/indictable misdemeanors)
- Thompson v. Utah, 170 U.S. 343, 18 S. Ct. 620 (U.S.) (discusses territorial applicability of federal constitutional guarantees)
- Collins v. Youngblood, 497 U.S. 37, 110 S. Ct. 2715 (U.S.) (rejected Thompson’s ex post facto reasoning; discusses territorial applicability)
- State ex rel. Breeden v. Lewis, 72 P. 388 (Utah) (recognizes continuity of territorial laws after statehood)