293 P.3d 1142
Utah Ct. App.2012Background
- Rincon was convicted of identity fraud under Utah Code § 76-6-1102(2)(a).
- He created a random nine-digit number and used it as a social security number for employment.
- The nine-digit number matched the SSN of a woman in Arizona; authorities investigated after unemployment benefits were affected.
- At trial Rincon moved to dismiss for insufficient evidence that he obtained personal identifying information of another, which the court denied.
- The court conducted a bench trial and subsequently convicted Rincon; appeal followed challenging both the statute’s scope and sufficiency of evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does 'obtains' require external action, not mere mental fabrication? | Rincon contends 'obtains' requires external, affirmative action to acquire information. | Rincon argues the statute may cover mental fabrication if read broadly, or is vague if so. | Plain meaning requires external action; mental fabrication does not satisfy 'obtains'. |
| Was there sufficient evidence Rincon 'obtained' another's information? | State contends the number used constitutes obtaining someone else’s information. | Rincon argues he merely invented a number with no external source. | Insufficient evidence; the conduct does not meet 'obtains' under the statute. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Gordon, 84 P.3d 1167 (Utah 2004) (sufficiency and weight of evidence standard for bench trials)
- State v. Green, 99 P.3d 820 (Utah 2004) (interpretation of criminal statutes and vagueness considerations)
- In re Z.C., 165 P.3d 1206 (Utah 2007) (statutory interpretation and plain meaning approach)
- Amax Magnesium Corp. v. Utah State Tax Comm’n, 796 P.2d 1256 (Utah 1990) (avoidance of inferring terms not in the statute)
- Government Emps. Ins. Co. v. Dennis, 645 P.2d 672 (Utah 1982) (ordinary meaning of statutory terms)