State v. Prisbrey, 479 P.3d 1126

On Dec. 31, 2017 Prisbrey left his home after lighting six candles in a tabletop Christmas village to propose to his girlfriend; minutes later the house was on fire and heavily damaged.
Fire officials observed two holes in the wall between the great room and garage, gasoline cans and other flammables stacked near a water heater in the garage, and rapid fire spread near the Christmas-village location; Marshal suspected arson and said a warrant would be needed to proceed further.
The State Fire Marshal and local fire chief did limited onsite inquiry and did not seek a search warrant; no further governmental investigation evidence was presented at the preliminary hearing.
Prisbrey’s insurer hired an investigator who inspected the scene, took debris samples (showing no accelerant near the origin), concluded the holes were created after the fire, and recommended payment; insurer paid over $350,000 on the claim.
The State charged Prisbrey with aggravated arson and filing a false insurance claim; at the preliminary hearing the State presented fire officials, and the defense presented the insurer’s investigator and the girlfriend; the magistrate declined to bind over on either charge.
The State appealed the bindover decision; the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the State’s evidence was speculative and was undermined by the insurer’s investigative evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause to bind over for aggravated arson	Circumstantial red flags: candles left burning, reported use of paint thinner, gasoline/flammables near water heater aligned with holes between rooms, rapid spread, sparse furnishings/storage-unit report	State’s theory rests on speculation: no accelerant found, insurer’s investigator concluded accidental cause and holes postdate fire, limited State investigation/no warrant sought	Bindover properly denied—State’s evidence was largely speculative and undermined by insurer’s investigation; magistrate did not abuse discretion
Probable cause to bind over for false insurance claim	Prisbrey filed a claim denying intentionality after these red flags—supports insurance-fraud charge	If no probable cause for arson, no basis for fraud charge; insurer’s paid claim supports innocence	Rises and falls with arson; magistrate’s denial affirmed
Effect of State’s limited on-scene investigation and failure to obtain a warrant	State had sufficient immediate facts to seek a warrant and bind over; lack of warrant not dispositive	State’s failure to investigate further and to obtain a warrant left key inferences untested and weakened its case	Court considered the omission relevant; absence of further investigation and the insurer’s contrary findings supported magistrate’s decision to deny bindover

State v. Clark, 20 P.3d 300 (Utah 2001) (probable cause at preliminary hearing equated with the reasonable-belief standard for arrest warrants)
State v. Lopez, 474 P.3d 949 (Utah 2020) (preliminary-hearing burden is low/light)
State v. Jones, 365 P.3d 1212 (Utah 2016) (magistrate may not resolve conflicting inferences that must be left to the factfinder)
Salt Lake City v. Carrera, 358 P.3d 1067 (Utah 2015) (distinguishing reasonable inference from speculation; inference must be grounded in facts)
State v. Schmidt, 356 P.3d 1204 (Utah 2015) (limited appellate deference to magistrate’s bindover application of law to facts)
State v. Nickles, 728 P.2d 123 (Utah 1986) (circumstantial evidence alone can suffice to prove arson)