State v. Karren, 2018 UT App 226

Police found Karren asleep in his van at a motel; officers observed a metal spoon with white residue (later tested positive for methamphetamine) on the passenger seat. Karren admitted recent meth use and that the residue was meth.
Karren directed officers to a black backpack in the backseat; inside were another spoon with residue, a glass meth pipe, syringes and caps, a small baggie of meth, and a glass pipe containing marijuana. The substances tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana.
Karren said he had agreed to transport the backpack and pipe for his roommate (and the roommate’s girlfriend) because the roommate feared police at their apartment; Karren also initially told the officer the items were in his vehicle when asked about ownership.
Charges: possession/use of methamphetamine, possession/use of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia.
At trial, defense requested an innocent-possession jury instruction and, before and during trial, raised untimely motions (missing evidence instruction, motion to suppress Miranda statements, motion to dismiss for selective/vindictive prosecution, and motion to continue). The district court granted a missing-evidence instruction, denied suppression after hearing testimony, denied the innocent-possession instruction, and denied dismissal.
Karren appeals arguing (1) entitlement to an innocent possession instruction under State v. Miller, and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to timely file pretrial motions.

Issue	Karren's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether Karren was entitled to an innocent-possession jury instruction	Miller requires an innocent-possession instruction for possession charges; Karren claimed he innocently possessed the drugs while delivering them for his roommate	No lawful owner existed to whom contraband could be returned; evidence did not show innocent purpose or transitory possession under Miller	Denied. Court held Miller’s innocent-possession defense requires evidence of an innocent acquisition and non‑illicit purpose (e.g., returning to a lawful owner); record lacked such evidence here
Whether trial counsel’s untimely pretrial motions rendered assistance ineffective	Counsel’s failure to timely move for continuance and to file three pretrial motions prejudiced Karren	Either the motions were futile or were ultimately considered on the merits; no reasonable probability of a different outcome shown	Denied. No prejudice shown: missing-evidence instruction was given, suppression was litigated and denied on the merits, dismissal claim was meritless, and continuance would not have changed result

State v. Miller, 193 P.3d 92 (Utah 2008) (recognizes an innocent-possession defense when controlled substance was innocently obtained, held without illicit purpose, and possession was transitory)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes two-part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Piansiaksone, 954 P.2d 861 (Utah 1998) (defendant is entitled to jury instruction on his legal theory if supported by evidence and not superfluous)