State v. Meza
2011 UT App 260
| Utah Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Meza robbed a Maverik store at about 5:00 a.m. by telling the clerk and her husband to open the drawer and that it was a stickup.
- The clerk feared a gun and testified Meza kept his hand in his pocket and tilted his head toward it, creating the impression of a weapon.
- The clerk also testified she believed Meza had a gun based on a shape in his pocket, though she did not reveal this at the preliminary hearing or in a witness statement.
- The husband feared for his life and stated he did not want to die for the money, noting Meza kept his hand in his pocket.
- Meza moved for a directed verdict at trial, which the court denied, raising issues about the interpretation of aggravated robbery and dangerous weapon statutes.
- On appeal, Meza argued the State failed to show use or threatened use of a dangerous weapon and sought a reduction to simple robbery; the State urged plain error review due to preserved objections.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence shows a dangerous weapon under 76-1-601(5)(b) | Meza argued no weapon representation was proven. | Meza contends the State did not prove a dangerous weapon was used or represented. | No plain error; representation shown by conduct and words sufficed. |
| Whether the conviction should be reduced to simple robbery due to insufficient evidence | Meza maintains insufficient evidence of a dangerous weapon in the course of robbery. | The State asserts sufficient evidence of a dangerous weapon representation. | Affirmed aggravated robbery; no plain error in not reducing to simple robbery. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ireland, 150 P.3d 532 (Utah 2006) (defines 'representation' to include gestures)
- State v. Reyos, 91 P.3d 861 (Utah Ct. App. 2004) (affirms aggravated robbery when threats to use a weapon exist even without possession)
- State v. Adams, 830 P.2d 310 (Utah Ct. App. 1992) (aggravated robbery upheld where threats plus bulging pocket implied weapon)
- Hartmann v. State, 783 P.2d 544 (Utah 1989) (threat to use a dangerous weapon suffices even without actual use or display)
- Holgate, 2000 UT 74 (Utah) (plain error standard for insufficient-evidence challenges)